7 20 1839 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/648d9d028000db949b517dd94e0a4744.pdf 0a93d25a6054b889e684ee6acbf428d7 PDF Text Text COMMDNWEALTH OF VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION RICHMOND SUPTS. MEMO. NO. May 23, I95U 3025 TO: Division Superintendents and Chairmen of Local School Boards FROM: Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction SUBJECT: Ruling of Attorney General of Virginia - Opinion of Supreme Court of the United States. I am enclosing a copy of an opinion rendered by the Attorney General in reply to an inquiry propounded to him by the State Board of Education at its meeting Thursday, May 27, I95H. I also quote below the action of the State Board of Education following receipt of the opinion: "In view of the opinion of the Attorney General on this day rendered, to which we adhere, the Board proclaims the following policy: "The local Boards of Education are hereby advised to proceed as at present and for the school session 195** - 55 to operate the public schools of this State on the same basis as they are now being operated and as heretofore obtained." �COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION RICHMOND SUPT3. IQ-10. NO. 3025 May 23, 1954 TOi Division Superintendents anil Ciiairmen of Local School Boards FROM: Dowell J. Howard. Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of Virginia SUBJECT! Ruling of Attorney General of Virginia— -Opinion of Supreme Court of the United States, I am enclosing a copy of an opinion rendered by the Attorney General in reply to an inquiry propounded to him by the State Board of Education at its meeting Thursday, b.y 27, 1954. Ruling by Virginia Attorney General J. Lindsay Almond, ir., May 27, 1954 While the basic iss- d before the Court has been determined, yet, the Court has ordered the case rostered to the docket and has not entered, end will not enter, a final decree adjudicating the respective rights of i.be parties litigant until further hearings aid proceedings are had and held., Ponding a final adjudication, it Is my opinion that section 140 of the Constitution of Virginia, and. the statute of Virginia enacted pursuant thereto, remain intact and unimpaired, imbued with full logal vitality and efficacy, I" is clearly manifest from the Court's opinion that it reserves , judgment on the matter of final, disposition of the causa before it until it could be further advised as to matters procedural relating to adjustment to the Court's opinion on the basic issue. You have also requested my opinion, in the event I conclude that our constitutional tic statutory provisions retain vitality, as to whether the State Board of Education would be within its legal rights to direct the division Superintendents throughout the State to proceed with plans for the coning school year on the same basis as have heretofore obtained. If is my to issue question qx.es tion opinion that the Board would have full legal authority such directives, in view of the Court’s retention of the as to how end when the Court's opinion on the basic is to be implemented. (See ne:rt page) �Supts. Memo Ho. 3025 - continued, I also quote below the action of the State Board of Education following receipt of the opinions "In view of the opinion of the Attorney General on this day rendered, to which we adhere, the Board proclaims the follow ing policys The local Boards of Education are hereby advised to proceed as at present and for the school session 1954-55 to operate the public schools of this State on the same basis as they are new being operated and as heretofore obtained." � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource RG 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Commonwealth of Virginia, State Board of Education, Richmond, Superintendent's Memo No. 3025 May 23, 1954 Description An account of the resource Memo from Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of Virginia to Division Superintendents and Chairmen of Local School Boards regarding the Ruling of the Attorney General of Virginia on the Opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States. 3 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of Virginia Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954-5-23 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_1_7 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/49554811bedc419bb3599d9488e1970e.pdf 79bf154d4064c6dd6c133a17a7069b6d PDF Text Text COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA Office of THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Richmond. May 2J, Honorable Blake T. Newton, President, State Board of Education, Hague, Virginia, M y dear Mr. Newton; The State Board of Education at its session on this date propounded the following inquiry upon which it has requested my opinion: In view of the opinion handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States on May 17 in the case of Dorothy E. Davis, et al.. Appellants, - V - County School Board of Prince Edward County, Virginia, et al,, what is the legal vitality and efficacy of section 1*40 of the Constitution of Virginia, and the statute enacted pursuant thereto, providing, in substance, that white and colored children shall not be taught in the same school? I am sure the Board is familiar with the opinion of the Supreme Court is, this case. In its opinion, the Court said; !We conclude that in the field of public education the ! doctrine of “separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold that the plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom the actions have been brought are, by reason of the segregation complained of, deprived of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. * * * l t As an integral part of the Court's conclusion, the following language was employed; "Because these are class actions, because of the wide applicability of this decision, and because of the great variety of local conditions, the formulation of decrees in these cases presents problems of considerable complexity. On reargument, the considera*tion of appropriate relief was necessarily subordinated to the primary question - the constitutionality of segregation in public education. We have now announced that such segregation is a denial of the equal protection of the laws. In order that we may have the full assistance of the parties in formulating decrees, the cases will be restored to the docket, and the parties are requested to present further argument on questions 4 and 5 previously propounded by the Court for the reargument this term. * * •" Question U referred to by the Court is as follows: "Assuming it is decided that segregation in public schools violates the Fourteenth Amendment �2. "(a) would a decree necessarily follow providing that, within the limits set by normal geographic school districting, Negro children should forthwith be admitted to schools of their choice, or "(b) may this Court, in the exercise of its equity powers, permit an effective gradual adjustment to be broughtabout from existing segregated systems to a system not based on color distinctions?” Question 5 is not deemed material in answering your inquiry. While the basic issue before the Court has been determined, yet, the Court has ordered the case restored to the docket and has not entered, and will not enter, a final decree adjudicating the respective rights of the parties litigant until further hearings and proceedings are had and held. Pending a final adjudication, it is my opinion that section 1*40 of the Constitution of Virginia, and the statute of Virginia enacted pursuant thereto, remain intact and unimpaired, imbued with full legal vitality and efficacy. It is clearly manifest from the Court's opinion that it reserves judgment on the matter of final disposition of the cause before it until it could be further advised as to matters procedural relating to adjustment to the Court's opinion on the basic issue. You have also requested my opinion, in the event I conclude that our constitutional and statutory provisions retain vitality, as to whether the Stats Board of Education would be within its legal rights to direct the Division Superintendents throughout the State to proceed with plans for the coming school year on the same basis as have heretofore obtained. It is my opinion that the Board would have full legal authority to issus such directives, in view of the Court's retention of the question as to how and when the Court's opinion on the basic question is to be implemented. Sincerely yours, /s/ J. LINDSAY AIMOND, JE. J. Lindsay Almond, Jr., Attorney General. 10-20 COPY � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource RG 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Commonwealth of Virginia, Office of the Attorney General, Richmond May 27, 1954 Description An account of the resource Copy of a letter from Virginia Attorney General J. Lindsay Almond, Jr. to Blake T. Newton, President of the State Board of Education, regarding the legal vitality and efficacy of Section 140 of the Constitution of Virginia. 2 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource J. Lindsay Almond, Virginia Attorney General Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954-5-27 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_1_10 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/1c933a7cf675bd3f5897f29353293945.pdf bdfbae8174052d7a3e0a4561e4ec7789 PDF Text Text COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Richmond SUPTSo MEMO. NO* 3029 June 73 1 9 h % TO; The Division Superintendent FROMs Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction You received the opinion of the Attorney General and Statement of the State Board of Education regarding the recent Supreme Court decision. You are also aware of the Statement of Governor Stanley calling for the operation of our public schools at present and for the session 195 -55 on the basis of segregation in accordance with U Section l j 0 of the Constitution* l. I am confident you recognize it as your duty and mine, as those charged with the responsibility for administering our public schools, to fully respect this authority. I am confident, also, that your local school boards with the State Board of Education will conform as they may give consideration to any modification of their existing policies. To me this is fundamental and essential until such time as we may receive decrees from the Supreme Court and advice from the Attorney General and the Governor of Virginia. To this end I solicit your wholehearted cooperation. It seems wise that I make the following statement regarding the school construction program. There has been no change in the policies of the State Board of Education regarding school building construction; the amount of State money to which each locality is entitled has been allotted, and the need for school facilities in many localities remains serious. It is my opinion that the better the facilities the less complicated will be the solution regardless of the final decree of the Court. Each community presents a different problem. M y recommendation is that each locality consider the problem in view of existing conditions. If you need the facility, have the proposed facility located properly, have or can arrange for financing, and have an agreement with your local school board, I recommend that you proceed without delay. If you should need assistance from the State Department of Education in modifying your previous decision, we stand ready and anxious to cooperate. I can also assure you of the earnest consideration of the State Board of Education. In the meantime it will be most helpful if you will submit the information on the basis requested in Supts. Memo. No. 3022 - Survey of School Building Needs. I am aware of the grave concern of many prompted by the decision of the Court and conscious of the fact that neither Court decisions nor Legislative Acts change the customs and beliefs of people. The nature of the final decree will determine the degree of difficulty involved in making the necessary changes in the administration of our public schools. In the meantime, the problem must receive the calm/ 'deliberate, forthright and prayerful consideration of all Virginians. It is the duty and, I know, the desire of those charged with the responsibility for administration to participate fully. �- 2- We are aware that problems are not solved by sudden decisions. Man's destiny has been and will continue to be shaped by what he believes to be right and by what he finally desires, not by hasty and faulty action.. The ultimate solution will come in varying degrees « The degree of difficulty will > vary with the problems as they present themselves in each school division of the State. Definite procedures cannot culminate until such time as we have knowledge of the final decree. In the meantime, however, the situation warrants our best thought. I will, as early as feasible, ask for a meeting of the Superintendent's Advisory Council to give me the benefit of their counsel. By this means I will have their sound advice in assuming to the best of m y ability the responsibilities of this office. This will also give me the opportunity to inform you through the Council of the present thoughts of the State Board of Education and the State Department. As we give thought to the matter we must consider ways and means of strengthening rather than weakening our public schools. It seems extremely wise, also, that we all be informed thoroughly of the situation in the State and in each locality and that we avoid public statements offering panaceas for the solution of the problem which will not clearly present itself until we are informed of the final decree of the Court. I will greatly appreciate your cooperation. DJH/p � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource RG 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Commonwealth of Virginia, State Board of Education, Richmond, Superintendents Memo No. 3029 June 7, 1954 Description An account of the resource Memo from Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of Virginia to the Division Superintendent regarding the opinion of the Attorney General and the Statement of the State Board of Education for the continuation of Section 140 of the Constitution of Virginia. 2 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of Virginia Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954-6-7 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_1_11 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/ac700e33fadfba6a858bb0c10de61562.pdf 422318049bdeb28ababa10388ec3448e PDF Text Text COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Richmond SUPTSo MEMO. NO. 3029 June 7 195U , TO: The Division Superintendent FROM: Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction You received the opinion of the Attorney General and Statement of the State Board of Education regarding the recent Supreme Court decision. You are also aware of the Statement of Governor Stanley calling for the operation of our public schools at present and for the session 195U-55 on the basis of segregation in accordance with Section lUO of the Constitution. I am confident you recognize it as your duty and mine, as those charged with the responsibility for administering our public schools, to fully respect this authority. I am confident, also, that your local school boards with the State Board of Education will conform as they may give consideration to any modification of their existing policies. To me this is fundamental and essential until such time as we may receive decrees from the Supreme Court and advice from the Attorney General and the Governor of Virginia. To this end I solicit your wholehearted cooperation. It seems wise that I make the following statement regarding the school construction program. There has been no change in the policies of the State Board of Education regarding school building construction; the amount of State money to which each locality is entitled has been allotted, and the need for school facilities in many localities remains serious. It is my opinion that the better the facilities the less complicated will be the solution regardless of the final decree of the Court. Each community presents a different problem. My recommendation is that each locality consider the problem in view of existing conditions. If you need the facility, have the proposed facility located properly, have or can arrange for financing, and have an agreement with your local school board, I recommend that you proceed without delay. If you should need assistance from the State Department of Education in modifying your previous decision, we stand ready and anxious to cooperate. I can also assure you of the earnest consideration of the State Board of Education. In the meantime it will be most helpful if you will submit the information on the basis requested in Supts. Memo. No. 3022 - Survey of School Building Needs. I am aware of the grave concern of many prompted by the decision of the Court and conscious of the fact that neither Court decisions nor Legislative Acts change the customs and beliefs of people. The nature of the final decree will determine the degree of difficulty involved in making the necessary changes in the administration of our public schools. In the meantime, the problem must receive the calm,' 'deliberate, forthright and prayerful consideration of all Virginians. It is the duty and, I know, the desire of those charged with the responsibility for administration to participate fully. C J �- 2- We are aware that problems are not solved by sudden decisions. M a n ’s destiny has been and will continue to be shaped by what he believes to be right and by what he finally desires, not by hasty and faulty action.. The ultimate solution will come in varying degrees. The degree of difficulty will vary with the problems as they present themselves in each school division of the State. Definite procedures cannot culminate until such time as we have knowledge of the final decree. In the meantime, however, the situation warrants our best thought. I will, as early as feasible, ask for a meeting of the Superintendent’s Advisory Council to give me the benefit of their counsel. By this means I will have their sound advice in assuming to the best of m y ability the responsibilities of this office. This will also give me the opportunity to inform you through the Council of the present thoughts of the State Board of Education and the State Department. As we give thought to the matter we must consider ways and means of strengthening rather than weakening our public schools. It seems extremely wise, also, that we all be informed thoroughly of the situation in the State and in each locality and that we avoid public statements offering panaceas for the solution of the problem which will not clearly present itself until we are informed of the final decree of the Court. I will greatly appreciate your cooperation. DJU/p � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource RG 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Commonwealth of Virginia, State Board of Education, Richmond, Superintendents Memo No. 3029 June 7, 1954 Description An account of the resource Memo from Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of Virginia to the Division Superintendent regarding the opinion of the Attorney General and the Statement of the State Board of Education for the continuation of Section 140 of the Constitution of Virginia. 2 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of Virginia Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954-6-7 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_1_12 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/70dd7f1895f3efa682a167341b50ea3c.pdf 297b0b0fd79d428ec9415d422194d3e8 PDF Text Text Report of a Speech by Attorney General J. Lindsay Almond of Virginia From Washington Po3t and Times-Herald, June 8, 1954. RICHMOND, Juns 7 (Associated Press).— Proposals ranging from aban­ donment of public education by the state to prompt and full integration of races :m the public schools were placed before State department heads today. Attorney General J. Lindsay Almond, Jr., told the state agency luncheon group the views were among some of many proposals he had heard put forward in the wake of a Supreme Court decision May 17 holding public school segre­ gation to be unconstitutional. Almond said ha was urging no specific course of action on his own part at this time, in relaying the suggestions to t&e department heads. The meeting was closed to the press but reporters learned that Almond cit8d t.t least seven suggestions that had come to him from various quarters. These included: 1. Outright abandonment of the State's traditional role in public education, leaving parents to educate their children within their own discretion end at their own expense. 2. Prompt and voluntary integration of pupils and teachers, without waiting for the final decrees in which the court is expected to spell out how ana when segregation must come to an end. 3. The drawing of school districts, wherever possible, on geographic and residential limes in order to keep the races separate to the maximum extent. A. Repeal of the State's compulsory attendance law and related school bus transportation service. 5. Designation of specific schools to be staffed with white teachers and other specific schools to be staffed with Negro teachers, 3,eaving parents their option of where to send their children. 6. Adopting a policy of not compelling any child of any race to attend a school in which he would find himself part of a racial minority, 7. Vesting local schools officials with authority, on the written petition of s. parent or guardian, to transfer a child whenever school officials and parents agree that a transfer would be for the pupil's best interests. �pt t- trz z 3 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource RG 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Report of a Speech by Attorney General J. Lindsay Almond of Virginia, From Washington Post and Times-Herald, June 8, 1954 Description An account of the resource Report of a closed meeting between the Attorney General J. Lindsay Almond, Jr. and a 'state agency luncheon group' regarding proposals suggested to him in wake of the Supreme Court decision May 17 holding public school segregation to be unconstitutional. 2 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Washington Post and Times-Herald Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954-6-8 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_1_13 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/ea28758fdb5400fe3c12b7c9c17a1ebc.pdf b82ef58cdb8d1117aecc87811eb4d372 PDF Text Text COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA STATE BOARD OF EDOCATION Richmond 16 SUPTS. MEMO. NO. 3154 June 1, 1955 To: The Division Superintendents From: Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction Subject: Text of the Supreme Court’ Opinion s Washington, May 31 (AP) - Following is the text of the Supreme Court's Opinion today on the public school segregation cases: (About 1400) These cases were decided on May 17, 1954. The opinions of that date declaring the fundamental principle that racial discrimination in public education is unconsti­ tutional, are incorporated herein by reference. All provisions of federal, state, or local law requiring or permitting such discrimination must yield to this principle. There remains for consideration the manner in which relief is to be accorded. "Because these cases arose under different local conditions and their dis­ position will involve a variety of local problems, we requested further argument on the question of relief. In view of the nationwide importance of the decision, we invited the Attorney General of the United States and the Attorneys General of all states requiring or permitting racial discrimination in public education to present their views on that question. The parties, the United States, and the states of Florida, North Carolina, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Maryland and Texas filed briefs and participated in the oral argument. "These presentations were informative and helpful to the court in its consideration of the complexities arising from the transition to a system of public education freed of racial discrimination. The presentations also demonstrated that substantial steps to eliminate racial discrimination in public schools already have been taken, not only in some of the communities in which these cases arose, but in some of the states ap­ pearing as amici curiae, and in other states as well. Substantial progress has been made in the District of Columbia and in the communities in Kansas and Delaware involved in this litigation. The defendants in the cases coming to us from South Carolina and Virginia are awaiting the decision of this court concerning relief. "Full implementation of these constitutional principles may require solution of varied local school problems. School authorities have the primary responsibility for elucidating, assessing, and solving these problems; courts will have to consider whether the action of school authorities constitutes good faith implementation of the governing constitutional principles. Because of their proximity to local conditions and the possible need for further hearings, the courts which originally heard these cases can best perform this judicial appraisal. Accordingly, we believe it appropriate to remand the cases to those courts. "In fashioning and effectuating the decrees, the courts will be guided by equitable principles. Traditionally, equity has been characterized by a practical flexibility in shaping its remedies and by a facility for adjusting and reconciling �Supts. Memo. No. 3154 - 2 - June 1, 1955 public and private needs. These cases call for the exercise of these traditional attributes of equity power. "At stake is the personal interest of the plaintiffs in admission to public schools as soon as practicable on a non discriminatory basis. To effectuate this interest may call for elimination of a variety of obstacles in making the transition to school systems operated in accordance with the constitutional principles set forth in our May 17, 1954, decision. Courts of equity may properly take into account the public interest in the elimination of such obstacles in a systematic and effective manner. But it should go without saying that the vitality of these constitutional principles cannot be allowed to yield simply because of disagreement with them. "While giving weight to these public and private considerations, the courts will require that the defendants make a prompt and reasonable start toward full compliance with our May 17, 1954, ruling. Once such a start has been made, the courts may find that additional time is necessary to carry out the ruling in an effective manner. The burden rests upon the defendants to establish that such time is necessary in the public interest and is consistent with good faith compliance at the earliest practicable date. To that end, the courts may consider problems related to administration, arising from the physical condition of the school plant, the school transportation system, personnel, revision of school districts and attendance areas into compact units to achieve a system of determining admission to the public schools on a non racial basis, and re­ vision of local laws and regulations which may be necessary in solving the foregoing problems. They will also consider the adequacy of any plans the defendants may pro­ pose to meet the problems and to effectuate a transition to a racially non discriminatory school system. During this period of transition, the courts will retain jurisdiction of these cases. "The judgments below, except that in the Delaware case, are accordingly reversed and remanded to the district courts to take such proceedings and to enter such orders and decrees consistent with this opinion as are necessary and proper to admit to public schools on a racially non discriminatory basis with all deliberate speed the parties to these cases. The judgment in the Delaware case — ordering the immediate admission of the plaintiffs to schools previously attended only by white children — is affirmed on the basis of the principles stated in our May 17, 1954, opinion, but the case is remanded to the Supreme Court of Delaware for such further proceedings as that court may deem necessary in light of this opinion. 'It is so ordered. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource RG 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Commonwealth of Virginia, State Board of Education, Richmond 16, Superintendents Memo No. 3154, June 1, 1955 Description An account of the resource Memo from Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction, to The Division Superintendents, relaying the text of the Supreme Court's Opinion on the public school segregation cases. 2 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Dowell J. Howard, Superintendent of Public Instruction Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1955-6-1 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_1_14 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/fdd014888cf6483e02a7a4657df8faeb.pdf d794050d37e456fdcbe5ebb8382a02a0 PDF Text Text IN T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S D I S T R I C T C O U R T F O R T H E E A S T E R N DISTRICT O F COLUMBIA A L E X A N D R I A DIVISION C O N S T A N C E C A R T E R , an infant, b y Eleanor Taylor, her parent and next friend, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. : : : THE SCHOOL B O A R D OF ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRG I N I A , a body corporate, et al., : Defendants, A L I C E B A I L E Y , an infant, by G e o r g e L. Bailey, her father and next friend, A R T H U R B R O W N , an infant, b y Dorothy B r o w n , his m o t h e r and next friend, G E R A L D B U L L O C K , an infant, by J a m e s E. Bullock, his father and next friend. S H E R M A N B U L L O C K , an infant, by R u b y Green, his m o t h e r and next friend. R O B E R T A F L A C K , an infant, by Irene Flack, her m o t h e r and next friend, S A M U E L F R E E M A N , an infant, by Lindsey F r e e m a n , his father and next friend, O Z E L L A G A T L I N G , an infant, by William Gatling, her father and next friend, H E L E N G E E , an infant, by Ellen Richardson, her m o t h e r and next friend, R O B E R T G O O D I N E , an infant, by Robert Goodine, his father and next friend R U T H G R E E N , an infant, by G e o r g e Green, her father and next friend, W I L L I A M G R E E N , an infant, b y Celestine Green, his m o t h e r and next friend, R I C H A R D H A R R I S , an infant, by Richard S. Harris, his father and next friend G E O R G E H E A T L E Y A N D J A C K H E A T L E Y , infants, by Julia Heatley, their m o t h e r and next friend, : : : : : : : : : : : : : CIVIL A C T I O N N O . 331 �D A N I E L J O H N S O N , an infant, by Daniel Johnson, his father and next friend. G E O R G E M A N S F I E L D , an infant, b y H a r r y Mansfield, his father and next friend, G E O R G E M A R S H A L L , an infant, by A n n a Marshall, his m o t h e r and next friend, JANE! M I N O R , E L A I N E M I N O R and F L O R E N C E M I N O R , infants, by Lola Minor, their m o t h e r and next friend, J A M E S H E N R Y M O O R E and J O H N R O B E R T M O O R E , infants, by E m m a M o o r e , their m o t h e r and next friend. F R A N K N E W M A N , an infant, by F. N e w m a n , his father and next friend, E R M O N N I C K E N S , an infant, by John Nickens, his father and next friend, A L V I N P O L L A R D , an infant, by Pauline Nealj her m o t h e r and next friend. B A R B A R A P R I C E , an infant, by Pauline Neal,, her m o t h e r and next friend, T H E L M A R U S S E L L , an infant, by O. Russell, her m o t h e r and next friend, J A M E S S H E P H E R D , an infant, b y Milton Shepherd, his father and next friend G E O R G I A T A Y L O R , an infant, by M a r y Lockett, her m o t h e r and next friend, J A N I E T I L L M A N , an infant, b y J. M , Tillman, her m o t h e r and next friend, W A L T E R V O L L I N S , an infant, b y Lucille Vollins, his m o t h e r and next friend, P A V E L L B E S S , an infant, by Lucille Bess, his m o t h e r and. next friend, O T T O H U G H B O S W E L L , an infant, by M a r y H, Boswell, his m o t h e r and next friend, K E N N E T H B U R T O N , an infant, b y Ruth Burton, his m o t h e r and next friend, W I L L I A M B Y R D , an infant, by Corrine Byrd, his m o t h e r and next fripnd, F R E D C O U N C I L , an infant, b y Aileen Council, his m o t h e r and next friend, B E R N A R D F E R N A N D E R S , an infant, by M a r y Fernanders, his m o t h e r and next friend. �JA M E S G A SK IL L , a n in fa n t, by Jo h n G a s k ill, S r . h is f a th e r and n e x t fr ie n d . A R C H IE G R E E N , a n in fa n t, b y G e o rg ia G re e n , h is m o th e r a n d n e x t fr ie n d IRVING G R E E N , an in fa n t, b y H e n ry G re e n , h is f a th e r and n e x t f rie n d , • BERN A RD H A RRIS, J R . , a n irfa n t, b y B e r n a r d H a r r i s , S r . , h is f a th e r and n e x t f rie n d , E A R L O . L O C K E T T , a n in fa n t, by H a ttie B ro w n , h is m o th e r a n d n e x t frie n d , ENNIS P IN K E T T , an in fa n t, by H e le n P in k e tt, h is m o th e r and n e x t f r i e n d , B E R N A R D S C O T T , an in fa n t, b y E n lie S c o tt, h is m o th e r and n e x t f rie n d , JA M E S S H E P P A R D , a n in fa n t, b y M ilto n S h e p p a rd , h is f a th e r a n d n e x t fr ie n d , W A L T E R SM ITH , an in fa n t, by F l o r e n c e S m ith , h is m o th e r a n d n e x t fr ie n d , C A R R O L L TH O M PSO N , a n in fa n t, b y C la r e n c e "T h o m p so n , h e r f a th e r and n e x t frie n d , L IL L IE TH O M PSO N , an in fa n t, b y R o b e rt T h o m p s o n , h e r f a th e r and n e x t fr ie n d . E R N E S T W ASHINGTON, a n in fa n t, by W illie W au ls, h is m o th e r and n e x t f r ie n d . R O B E R T W A T ER S, an in fa n t, by In n a W a te r s , h is m o th e r and n e x t fr ie n d , : and G E O R G E L . B A IL E Y , D O RO TH Y BROW N, JA M E S E . B U L L O C K , RUBY G R E E N , IR E N E F L A C K , LIN D SEY : F R E E M A N , W ILL IA M G A T L IN G , E L L E N R IC H A R D ­ SON, R O B E R T GO ODIN E, G E O R G E G R E E N , : C E L E S T IN E G R E E N , R ICH A RD S.. H A RRIS,- JU LIA H E A T L E Y , D A N IE L JOHNSON, H A RRY M A N SF IE L D , ; ANNA M A R SH A LL, LOLA M IN OR, EMMA M O O RE, F . NEW M AN, JO H N N ICK EN S, S T E R L IN G H . HARRIS : P A U L IN E N E A L , O. R U S S E L L , M IL T O N S H E P H E R D , M ARY L O C K E T T , J . M . T IL L M A N , L U C IL L E V O LU N S: L U C IL L E BESS, M ARY H . B O S W E L L , R U TH B U RTO N , C O R R IN E BY RD , A IL E E N CO U N CIL, MARY F E R N A N D E R S , JO HN G A SK IL L , S R ., GEORGIA G R E E N HENRY G R E E N , BERN A RD H A RRIS, SR. , H A T T IE : BROW N, H E L E N P IN K E T T , E N L IE SC O T T , M IL T O N S H E P P A R D , F L O R E N C E SM ITH , C L A R E N C E : TH O M PSO N , R O B E R T TH O M PSO N , .W ILLIE W AULS, AND INNA W A T E R S, : A p p lic a n ts fo r In te rv e n tio n �MOTION TO INTERVENE 4 T h e a b o v e - n a m e d applicants for intervention respectfully m o v e the Court for an order permitting them, as m e m b e r s of the class on behalf of w h i c h this action is brought, to intervene as parties-plaintiff in this action, and permitting their proposed complaint in intervention annexed hereto to be filed, in order to assert the matters set forth therein, upon the following grounds: 1. Infant applicants for intervention are a m o n g those generally classified as Negroes, are citizens of the United States and of the C o m m o n ­ wealth of Virginia, and are residents of and domiciled in the County of Arlington, Virginia. T h e y are within the statutory age limits of eligibility to attend the public senior high schools of said County and possess all quali­ fications and satisfy all requirements for admission thereto, and are in fact'/ attending one of the public schools, torwit, the Hoffman- B o s t o n High School, of said County under the supervision, operation and control of defendants. 2. Adult applicants for intervention are a m o n g those generally classified as Negroes, are citizens of tho United States and of the C o m m o n ­ wealth of Virginia, and are reSiddSts of and domiciled in the County of Arlington, Virginia. T h e y are parents or guardians of infant applicants for intervention, and are taxpayers of the United States and of said C o m m o n ­ wealth and County. All adult applicants for intervention having control or charge of any u n e x e m p t e d child w h o has reached the seventh birthday and has not passed the sixteenth birthday are required to send said child to attend school or receive instruction (Code of Virginia, 1950, Title 22, Chapter 12, Article 4, sections 22-251 to 22-256). 3. Applicants for intervention should be permitted to intervene as parties-plaintiff in this action upon the following grounds: (a) T h e y are m e m b e r s of the class on behalf of which the original action is brought. (b) T h e y have a substantial interest in the subject matter of the action. (c) T h e representation of their interest by the original plain­ tiff and/or plaintiffs by intervention in this action is or m a y be inadequate for the reason that the original plaintiff �5 has withdrawn f r o m the H o f f m a n - B o s t o n High School, and one of the two intervening plaintiffs has been graduated f r o m said school, and the other of the intervening plain­ tiffs is expected to be graduated f r o m said school during the current school session and before the fin.al adjudica­ tion of this action. (d) T h e y are and will be bound by any judgment, decree or order heretofore or hereafter entered in this action. (e) Their interest and the m a i n action have questions of law and fact in c o m m o n . (f) Their intervention will not to any extent delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties. 4. T h e interest of applicants for intervention is such that their intervention in this action is necessary to the protection of their interest b e c ause of the following facts: (a) Infant applicants for intervention are within the statutory age limits of eligibility to attend the public senior high schools of the County of Arlington, Virginia, and possess all qualifications and satisfy all requirements for a d ­ mission thereto, as hereinbefore set forth in para g r a p h 1 hereof. (b) Adult applicants for intervention having control or charge of any u n e x e m p t e d child w h o has reached the seventh birthday and has not p a ssed the sixteenth birthday are required to send said child to attend school or receive instruction (Code of Virginia, 1950, Title 22, Chapter 12, Article 4, sections 22-251 to 22-256), as hereinbefore set forth in para g r a p h 2 hereof. (c) Defendants have denied, and are denying, because of their race or color, infant applicants for intervention, and all other N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, public senior high school educational opportunities, advantages and facili­ ties equal to the public senior high school educational o p p o r ­ tunities, advantages and facilities afforded and available to children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County w h o are not Negroes, and have enforced and e x e ­ cuted and are enforcing and executing laws of the C o m m o n ­ wealth of Virginia, and have enforced, executed and pursued and are enforcing, executing and pursuing, policies, practices, c u s t o m s and usages, which prohibit, because of their race or color, infant applicants for intervention, and all other N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, f r o m attending the only public senior high, school of said County affording a senior high school education equal to that afforded all other qualified students w h o are not Negroes, and w hich c o m p e l infant applicants for Intervention, and all other N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, to attend a public school segregated and set apart for N e g r o students residing in said C o u n t y , and thereby have denied, and are denying, infant ap­ plicants for intervention their privileges and immunities as citizens of the United States, their liberty and property with­ out due process of law, and the equal protection of the laws, secured by the Fourteenth A m e n d m e n t of the Constitution �of the United States, section 1, and the rights secured by Title 8, United States Code, section 41® (d) Defendants have denied, and are denying, because of their race or color, adult applicants for intervention, and all other parents and guardians of Negro children of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, because of their race or color and/or the race or color of their respective children, rights and privileges of sending their respective children to the only public senior high school established, operated or maintained by defendants affording public senior high school educational opportunities, advantages and facilities equal to the public senior high school educational opportunities, advantages and facilities afforded and available to children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County who are not Negroes, and thereby have denied, and are denying adult applicants for intervention, and other parents and guardians of Negro children of public school age similarly situated re­ siding in said County, their privileges and immunities as citi­ zens of the United States, their liberty and property without due process of law, and the equal protection of the laws, se­ cured by the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, section 1, and the right secured by Title 8, United States Code, section 41® (e) Applicants for intervention are members of the class on be­ half of which this action is brought, and are entitled to the benefit of and are affected by any judgment, decree or order entered herein. (f) The representation of the interest of applicants for inter­ vention by the original plaintiff and/or the plaintiffs by intervention in this action is or may be inadequate for the reason that the original plaintiff has withdrawn from the Hoffman-Boston High School, and one of the two intervening plaintiffs has been graduated from said school, and the other of the intervening plaintiffs is expected to be graduated from said school during the current school session and before the final adjudication of this action. (g) If the original fail, the cause brought a class duly intervenes plaintiffs and the plaintiffs by intervention of action fails, even though they may have action, unless some other member of the class as a party-plaintiff. "WHEREFORE, it is prayed that an order may be entered permitting the above-named applicants for intervention to intervene as parties-plaintiff in this action, and permitting their proposed complaint in intervention annexed hereto to be filed, in order to assert the matters set forth therein. /s/ - 6 - Oliver W. Hill________ Oliver W. Hill 623 North Third Street Richmond 19, Virginia �/s/ Martin A. Martin Martin A. Martin 623 North Third Street Richmond 19, Virginia /s/ Spottsrrood W. Robinson, III Spottswood If Robinson, III f. 623 North Third Street Richmond 19, Virginia /s/ Leon A. Ransom_____________ Leon A. Ransom 1939 Thirteenth Street, N.W. Washington, D. C. Counsel for Applicants for Intervention. �POINTS AMD AU1H0RI11ES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR INTERVKDITION 1. Intervention must be granted when the representation of the ap­ plicants’ interest by existing parties is or may be inadequate and the appli­ cants are or may be bound by a judgment in the action, and may be granted when the applicants’ claim and the main action have a question of law or fact in common. Rule 24(a), (b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 2. Further necessary or proper relief based on a declaratory judg­ ment or decree may be granted, after reasonable notice and hearing, against any adverse party whose rights have been determined by such judgment. Title 28, United States Code, section 2202. /s/ Spottswood W. Robinson. Ill______________ Of Counsel for Applicants for Intervention. - 8 - �IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION CONSTANCE CARTER, an infant, by Eleanor Taylor, her parent and next friend, et al.. Plaintiffs, vs. : THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA, a body corporate, et. al., Defendants, ALICE BAILEY, an infant, by George L. Bailey, her father and next friend, ARTHUR BROWN, an infant, by Dorothy Bronvn, his mother and next friend GERALD BULLOCK, an infant, by James E„ Bullock, his father and next friend, SHERMAN BULLOCK, an infant, by Ruby Green, his mother and next friend, ROBERTA FLACK, an infant, mother and next friend, by IreneFlack, her SAMUEL FREEMAN, an infant, by Lindsey Freeman, his father and next friend, OZELLA GATLING, an infant, by William Gatling, her father and next friend, HELEN GEE, an infant, by Ellen Richardson, her mother and next friend, ROBERT GOODINE, an infant, by Robert Goodine, his father and next friend, RUTH* GREEN, an infant, by George Green, her father and next friend, WILLIAM GREEN, an infant, by Celestine Green, his mother and next friend, RICHARB HARRIS, an infant, by Richard S. Harris, his father and next friend, GEORGE HEATLEY and JACK HEATLEY, infants, by Julia Heatley, their mother and next friend. - 9 - : : : : : : : : s ! s s ! s s CIVIL ACTION NO. 331 �DANIEL JOHNSON, an infant, by Daniel Johnson, his father and next friend, GEORGE MANSFIELD, an infant, by Harry Mansfield, his father and next friend, GEORGE MARSHALL, an infant, by Anna Marshall, his mother and next friend, JANE MINOR, ELAINE MINOR and FLORENCE MINOR," infants, b y Lola Minor, their mother and next friend, JAMES HENRY MOORE and JOHN ROBERT MOORE, infants, by Emma Moore, their mother and next friend, FRANK NEWMAN, and infant, by F. Newman, father and next friend, his ERMON NICKENS, an infant, by John Nickens, his father and next friend, ALVIN POLLARD, an infant, b y Sterling H. Harris,' his father and next friend, BARBARA PRICE, an infant, by Pauline Neal, her mother and next friend, THEIMA RUSSELL, an infant, by 0. Russell, her mother and next friend, JAMES SHEPHERD, an infant, by Milton Shepherd, his father and next friend, GEORGIA TAYLOR, an infant, b y Mary Lockett, her mother and next friend, JANIE TILLMAN, an infant, by J. M. Tillman, her mother and next friend, WALTER VOLLINS, an infant, by Lucille Vollins, his mother and next friend, PAVELL BESS, an infant, by Lucille Bess, his mother and next friend, OTTO HUGH BOSWELL, an infant, by Mary H. Boswell, his mother and next friend, KENNETH BURTON, an infant, by Ruth Burton, his mothdr and next friend, WILLIAM BYRD, an infant, by Corrine Byrd, his mother and next friend, FRED COUNCIL, an infant, by Aileen Council, his mother and next friend, BERNARD FERNANDERS, an infant, by Mary Fernanders, his mother and next friend, - 10 - �JAMES GASKILL, an infant, by John Gasld.ll, Sr., his father and next friend, ARCHIE GREEN, an infant, by Georgia Green, his mother and next friend, IRVING GREEN, an infant, by Henry Green, his father and next friend, BERNARD HARRIS, JR., an infant, by Bernard Harris, Sr., his father and next friend, EARL 0. LOCKET, an infant, by Hattie Brown, his mother and next friend, ENNIS PINKETT, an infant, by Helen Pinkett, his mother and next friend, BERNARD SCOTT, an infant, by Enlie Scott, his mother and next friend, JAMES SHEPPARD, an infant, by Milton Sheppard, his father and next friend, WALTER SMITH, an infant, by Florence Smith, his mother and next friend, CARROLL THOMPSON, an infant, by Clarence Thompson, her father and next friend, LILLIE THOMPSON, an infant, by Robert Thompson, her father and next friend, ERNEST WASHINGTON, an Infant, by Willie Wauls, his mother and next friend, ROBERT WATERS, an infant, by Inna Waters, his mother and next friend, j i : • j s : : : ; : : : and GEORGE L. BAILEY, DOROTHY BROWN, JAMES E. BULLOCK, RUBY GREEN, IRENE FLACK, LINDSE' FREEMAN, WILLIAM GATLING, ELLEN RICHARDSON, ROBERT GOODINE, GEORGE GREEN, CELESTINE GREEN, RICHARD S. HARRIS, JULIA HEATLEY, DANIEL JOHNSON, HARRY MANSFIELD, ANNA MARSHALL, LOLA ICHOR, EMMA MOORE, F. NEWMAN, JOHN NICKENS, STERLING H. HARRIS, PAULINE HEAL, 0 . RUSSELL, : MILTON SHEPHERD, MARY LOCKETT, J. M. TILLMAN, LUCILLE VOLLINS, LUCILLE BESS, MARY H. BOSWELL, RUTH BURTON, CORRIHE BYRD, AILEEN COUNCIL, MARY FERNANDERS, JOHN GASKILL, SR., GEORGIA GREEN, HENRY GREEN, BERNARD HARRIS, SR., HATTIE BROWN, HELEN PINKETT, ENLIE SCOTT, MILTON SHEPPARD, FLORENCE SMITH, CLARENCE THOMPSON, ROBERT THOMPSON, WILLIE WAULS, and INNA WATERS, Interveners - 11 - s • . : s s ! i �INTERVENERS 1 COMPLAINT I I INTERVENTION I 1. (a) The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked under Title 28, United States Code, section 1331. This action arises under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, section 1, and the Act of May 31, 1870, Chapter 114, section 16, 16 Stat. 144 (Title 8, United States Code, section 41), as hereinafter more fully appears. The matter in controversy exceeds, exclusive of interest and cost, the sum of value of Tnree Thousand (53,000.00) Dollars. (b) United States Code, section 1343. The jurisdiction of this Court is also invoked under This action is authorized by the Act of April 20, 1871, Chapter 22, section 1, 17 Stat. 13, (Title 8, United States Code, section 43), to be commenced by any citizen of the United States or other person 'within the jurisdiction thereof to redress the deprivation, under color of a state law, statute, ordinance, regulation, custom or usage, of rights, privileges and immunities secured by the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitu­ tion of the United States, section 1, and by the Act of May 31, 1870, Chapter 114, section 16, 16 Stat. 144, (Title 8, United States Code, section 41), pro­ viding for the equal rights of citizens and of all persons within the juris­ diction of the United States, as hereinafter more fully appears. (c) The jurisdiction of this Court is also invoked under Title 28, United States Code, section 2281. This is an action for a permanent injunction restraining, upon the ground of unoonstitutionality, the enforcement, operation and execution of provisions of the Constitution and statutes of the Common­ wealth of Virginia by restraining the action of defendants, officers of such Commonwealth, in the enforcement and execution of such Constitutional provisions and statutes, as hereinafter more fully appears. (d) The jurisdiction of this Court is also invoked under Title 28, United States Code, section 2202. This is an action for the granting of further necessary and proper relief, based on a declaratory judgment, against adverse - 12 - �parties whose rights have been determined by such Judgment, as hereinafter more fully appears. 2. This action is a proceeding under Title 28, United States Code, sections 2201 and 2202, for a judgment declaratory of the rights and other legal relations of interveners, and all other Negro children attending the public schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and their respective parents and guardians, similarly situated and affected with reference to the matters here involved, and an injunction, for the purpose of determining and redressing questions and matters of actual controversy between the parties, to-wit: (a) The question whether the action of defendants, or either of them, in enforcing cr executing against infant interveners, or any other Negro child of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington,' Virginia, or either or any of them, the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia hereinafter specified in paragraph 15 hereof, or either or any of them, which laws prohibit, because of their race or color, infant interveners, and all other Negro children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, from attending the only public senior high school of said County affording a senior high school education equal to that afforded all other qualified students who are not Negroes, and which compel infant interveners, and all other Negro children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, to attend the senior high school department of a segregated public school set apart for Negro students in said County, denies infant interveners, and other Negro children of public school age similarly situated, residing in said County, their privileges and immunities as citizens of the United States, their liberty and property without due process of law, and the equal protection of the laws, secured b y the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, section 1, and the rights secured b y Title 8, United States Code, section k-1, and is for these reasons unconstitutional and void. (b) The question whether the action of defendants, or either of them, in enforcing, executing or pursuing against infant interveners, or any other - 13 - �Hegro child of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington Virginia, or either or any cf them, the policy, practice, custom and usage hereinafter specified in paragraph 16 hereof, which policy, practice, custom and usage prohibit, because c-f their race or color, infant interveners, and all other Hegro children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, from attending the only senior high school of said County affording a senior high school education equal to that afforded all other quali­ fied students who are not Negroes, and which compel infant interveners, and all other Hegro children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County to attend the senior high school department of a segregated public school set apart for Negro students in said County, denies infant interveners, and other Negro children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, their privileges and immunities as citizens of the United States, their liberty and property without due process of law, and the equal protection of the laws, secured b y tbs Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, section 1, and the rights secured by Title 8 , United States Code, section 1(1, and is for these reasons unconstitutional and void* (c) The question whether the action of defendants, or either of them, in enforcing, executing or pursuing against adult interveners, or any other parent or guardian of Negro children of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, or either or any of them, the policy, practice, custom and usage hereinafter specified in paragraph 18 hereof, of denying them, because of their race or color and/or the race or color of their respective children, rights and privileges of sending their respective children to a public senior high school in said County with educational opportunities, advantages and facilities, including those hereinafter specified, equal to the educational opportunities, advantages and facilities afforded and available to children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County who are not Negroes, denies adult interveners, and other parents and guardians of Negro children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, their privileges and immunities as citizens of the United States, their liberty and property without due process of law, and the equal protection of the laws. - It - �secured 'by the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, section 1, and the rights secured by Title 8, United States Code, section kl, and is for these reasons unconstitutional and void. 3. Infant interveners are among those generally classified as negroes, are citizens of the United States and of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and are residents of and domiciled in the County of Arlington, Virginia. are with­ They in the statutory limits of eligibility to attend the public senior high schools of said County, and possess all qualifications and satisfy all requirements for admission thereto, and are in fact attending the senior high school department of one of the public schools, to-wit, the Hoffman-Boston High School, of said County under the supervision, operation and control of defendants. b. Adult interveners are among those generally classified as Negroes, are citizens of the United States and of the Commonwealth of Virginia, residents of and domiciled in the County of Arlington, Virginia. and are They are parents or guardians of infant interveners, and are taxpayers of the United States and of said Commonwealth and County. All adult interveners having con­ trol or charge of any unexempted child who has reached the seventh birthday and has not passed the sixteenth birthday are required to send said child to attend school or receive instruction (Code of Virginia, 1950, Title 22, Chapter 12, Article k, sections 22-251 to 22-256). 5 . Interveners bring this action in their own behalf, and, there being common questions of law and fact affecting the rights of all other Negro children attending the public schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and their respective parents and guardians, similarly situated and affected with reference to the matters here involved, who are so numerous as to make it impracticable to bring all before the Court, and a common relief being sought, as will herein­ after more fully appear, bring this action pursuant to Rule 23 (a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as a class action, also on behalf of all other Negro children attending the public schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and their respective parents and guardians, similarly situated and affected with reference to the matters here involved. - 15 - �6. Defendant County School Board of Arlington County, Virginia, exists pursuant to the Constitution and lavs of the Commonwealth of Virginia as an administrative department of the Commonwealth of Virginia discharging governmental functions (Constitution of Virginia, Article IX, section 133; Code of Virginia, 1950, Title 22, Chapter 1, sections 22-1, £2-2, 22-5 to 22-9, Chapter 6, Article 1, sections £2-b^ to 22-57> Chapter 6, Article 2, sections 22-59 to 22-88.2, Chapters 7 to 15, sections 22-101 to 22-330), and is declared b y law to he a Body corporate (Code of Virginia, 1950, Title 22, Chapter 6, Article 2, section 22063). 7. Defendant William A. Early is Division Superintendent of Schools of the County of Arlington, Virginia. He holds office pursuant to the Consti­ tution and laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia as an administrative officer of the public free school system of Virginia (Constitution of Virginia, Article XX, section 133; Code of Virginia, 1950, Title 22, Chapter 1, section 22-1, 22-2, 22-5 to 22-9, Chapter 22->+5 to 22-330). k, sections 22-31 to 22-lt-l, Chapters 6 to 15, sections He is under the authority, supervision and control of, and acts pursuant to, the orders, policies, practices, customs and usages of, and established by, defendant County School Board of Arlington County, Virginia. He is made a defendant herein in his official capacity. 8. The Commonwealth of Virginia has declared public education a State function. The Constitution of Virginia, Article IX, section 129, provides "Free schools to he maintained. The General Assembly shall establish and maintain an efficient system of public free schools throughout the State". Pursuant to this mandate, the General Assembly of Virginia has established a system of public free schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia according to a plan set out in Title 22, Chapters 1 to 15, inclusive, of the Code of Virginia of 1950. The establishment, maintenance and administration of the public school system of Virginia is vested in a State Board of Education, a Superintendent of Public Instruction, Division Superintendents of Schools, and County, City and Town School Boards (Constitution of Virginia, Article IX, sections 131-133; Code of Virginia, 1950, Title 22, Chapter 1, section 22-2). - 16 - �9. The public schools of the County of Arlington, Virginia, are under the control and supervision of defendants, acting as an administrative department or division of the Commonwealth of Virginia (Code of Virginia, 1950, Title 22, Chapter 1, sections 22-1, 22-2), Defendants County School Board of Arlington County, Virginia, is empowered and required to establish and maintain an efficient system of public free schools in said County (Code of Virginia, 1950, Title 22, Chapter 1, sections 22-1, 22-5); to provide suitable and proper school buildings, furniture and equipment, and to maintain, manage and control the same (Code of Virginia, 1950, Title 22, Chapter 1, Article 1, section 22-72, Article 4, section 22-97); to determine the studies to be pursued, the methods of teaching, and the government to he employed in the schools (Code of Virginia, 1950, Title 22, Chapter 6, Article 4, section 22-97, Chapter 12, Article 2, sections 22-233 to 22-240); to employ teachers (Code of Virginia, I95O, Chapter 6 , Article 1, section 22-72, Article 1 , section 22-97, Chapter 11, section 22; 202); to provide for the transportation of pupils (Code of Virginia, 1950, Title 22, Chapter 6, Article 1, section 22-72:; to enforce the school laws (Code of Virginia, 1950, Chapter 6, Article 1, section 22-72, Chapter 6, Article 4, sec­ tion 22-97); and to perform the numerous other duties, activities and functions essential to the establishment, maintenance and operation of the schools of said County (Code of Virginia, I95O, Chapter 1, sections 22-1 to 22-10, Chapters 1 to ; 6 , sections 22-30 to 22-88,2, Chapters 4 to 5, sections 22-30 to 22-44, Chapter 6, Article 1, sections 22-4-5 to 22-58, Article 4, sections 22-89 to 22-100, Chapters 4 -to 15, sections 22-30 to 22-330, Chapters 7 to 15, sections 22-101 to 22-230). 10. On the 4th day of September, 194-7, the original plaintiff, and infant, among those generally classified as Degrees, residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, b y her mother, filed her complaint in this Court alleging that the then defendants had pursued, and were pursuing, policies, practices, customs and usages of denying, because of their race or color, said plaintiff, and other Hegro children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, senior high school educational opportunities, advantages and facilities - 17 - �equal to those afforded children similarly situated residing in said County who are not Negroes, and thereby had denied, and were denying, them the equal pro­ tection of the laws secured b y the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, section 1, and the rights secured by Title 8, United States Code, section 4-1. In her complaint, said plaintiff sought a judgement or decree declaring that the policies, practices, customs and -usages aforesaid were violative of the Constitution and laws, aforesaid, and a permanent injunction restraining said defendants from making such distinctions or any distinction based upon race or color in the opportunities, advantages or facilities afforded for the education of Negro children and children who are not Negroes residing in said.County, or, in the alternative, a permanent injunction restraining said defendants from denying said plaintiff, and those on whose behalf she sued, admission to the enrollment in the senior high school established, maintained and operated exclusively for children of public school age residing in said County who are not Negroes. 11. On the 2kth. day of October, 19^9> Julius Brevard and Peggy Council, each infants, among those generally classified as Negroes, residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, by their respective parents, filed their petition alleging that defendants herein had denied them senior high school educational opportunities, advantages and facilities, equal to the senior high school educational opportunities, advantages and facilities afforded and avail­ able to children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County who are not Negroes, and seeking intervention as parties- plaintiff, and praying for the same relief sought by the original plaintiff. By an order entered on the 2^th day of October 19^9, their intervention was as parties-plaintiff permitted. 12. On the 7th day of December, 19^9, this Court rendered a written opinion determining that the original plaintiff and the intervening plaintiffs had not shown that defendants had unlawfully discriminated against them or other Negro children of public school age residing in the County of Arlingon, Virginia, On the 12th day of December, 19^-9, this Court entered a final judgment dismission the complaint and petitions. - 18 - �13. Said plaintiffs having appealed from the judgment aforesaid to the United States Court of Appeals for the Four-fo Circuit, said Court, on the 31st day of May, 1950, rendered an. opinion holding that defendants had denied, heeause of their race or color, said intervening plaintiffs, and other Negro children of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, senior high school educational opportunities, advantages and facilities equal to those afforded and available to children of public school age residing in said County who are not negroes, which said opinion, and a mandate issued to this Court, reversed the aforesaid judgment of this Court and remanded the case to this Court for further proceedings in accordance with said opinion. 14. On the 8th day of September, 1950, this Court entered a judgment providing in part as follows: "Pursuant to said opinion and mandate, and sections 2201 and 2202 of Title £8 of the United States Code, it is DECLARED: "1. That the action of the defendants, and each of them, in denying, or in refusing or failing to afford, because of their race or color, plaintiffs Julius Brevard and Peggy Council, or any other Hegro child similarly situated, the same or equivalent public educational opportunities, advantages and facilities for a senior high school education as those afforded white children similarly situated, or in making any other distinction based upon race of color in any of the educational opportunities, advantages or facilities afforded by said de­ fendants for the public education of senior high school children residing in Arlington County, Virginia, has denied, and is denying, said plaintiffs, and other Negro children similarly situated, the equal protection of the laws secured by section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and the rights secured by section tl of Title 8 of the United States Code: and "2. That the defendants must provide said plaintiffs, and all other Hegro children similarly situated, the same or equivalent public senior high school educational opportunities, advantages and facilities in conformity to the equal protection clause of section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Consti­ tution of the United States, and the provisions of section it1 of Title 8 of the United States Code, and must provide them as soon as they do for pupils of any ether group or race. "A. It is therefore ADJUDGED, ORDERED and DECREED that the defendants, the School Board of Arlington County, Virginia, and William A. Early, Division Superintendent of Schools of Arlington County, Virginia, and each of them, their successors in office, and their agents and employees, be, and they hereby are, permanently and perpetually restrained and enjoined forth­ with from denying, and from refusing or failing to afford. - 19 - * �"because of their race or color., said plaintiffs, or any other Negro child similarly situated, the same or equivalent public educational opportunities, advantages and facilities for a senior high school education as those afforded white children similarly situated, and from making any other distinction "based upon race or color in any of the opportunities, advantages or facilities provided "by said defendants for the public education of senior high school children residing in Arlington County, Virginia, * * * * * * * ” 15. Article IX, section 1 4 0 of the Constitution of the Commonwealth *-, of Virginia provides as follows? "White and colored children shall not be taught in the same school," The Code of Virginia of Title 22, Chapter 12, Article 1, section 22-221, provides as follows? t "White and colored persons shall not be taught in the same school, but shall be taught in separate schools, under the same general regulations as to management, usefulness and efficiency." l6o Defendants, and each of them, and their agents and employees, have pursued, and are pursuing, the policy, practice, custom and usage of establishing, maintaining and operating separate public schools for children of public school age who are and are not, considered to be of Negro descent, respec­ tively, residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, and of denying all Negro children of public school age similarly situated residing§in said County, because of their race or color, the right and privilege of attending the public senior high school, to-wit, the Washington-Lee High School, established, maintained and operated exclusively for children of public school age residing in said County who are not Negroes, and of compelling all Negro children residing in said County, including all infant interveners, and all other Negro children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, because of their race of color, to attend the senior high school department of a segregated public school, to-wit, the Hoffman-Boston High School, set apart for Negro students in said County0 17o Defendants, and each of them, and their agents and employees, have enforced, executed and pursued, and are enforcing, executing and pursuing, against infant interveners, and all other Negro children of public school age - 20 - �similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, the policy, practice, custom and usage of denying them because of their race or color, public senior high school educational opportunities, advantages and facilities, including, those hereinafter specified, equal to those afforded and available to children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County who are not Negroes. The senior high school department of the Hoffman-Boston High School, which defendants, and each of them, and their agents and employees, require infant interveners, and all other Negro children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, to avail themselves, is unequal and inferior in plant, equipment, curricula, and in other opportunities, advantages and facilities, and in all other material respects, to the public senior high school established, maintained and operated for all other children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County who are not Negroes. Infants interveners, and all other Negro children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, are required to avail them­ selves of said unequal and inferior opportunities, advantages and facilities because of their race or color. 18. Defendants, and each of them, and their agents and employees, have enforced, executed and pursued, and are enforcing, executing and pursuing, against adult interveners, and all other parents and guardians of Negro child­ ren of public school age similarly situated residing in the county of Arlington, Virginia, the policy, practice, custom and usage of denying them because of their race or color and/or the race and color of their respective children, rights and privileges of sending their respective children to a public senior high school in said County with educational opportunities, advantages and facilities, including those hereinbefore specified, equal to the educational opportunities, advantages and facilities afforded and available to children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County who are not Negroes. 19o Defendants, and each of them, and their agents and employees, have pursued, and are pursuing, the policy, practice, custom and usage herein­ before specified in paragraph 16 hereof in the enforcement and execution of the - 21 - �laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia hereinbefore specified in paragraph 1J hereof, but for which laws defendants would not have pursued, and would not be now pursuing, the policies, practices, customs and usages hereinbefore specified in paragraph 16 to 18, inclusive, hereof, and would not have denied, and would not now deny, infant interveners, or other Negro children of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, the right and privilege of attending the public senior high school established, maintained and operated for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County who are not Negroes, and would not have deprived, and would not continue to deprive, infant interveners, or other Negro children of public school age similarly situated residing in said county, of their rights secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, as hereinbefore and herein­ after more fully set forth. 20. Infant interveners, and all other Negro children of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, are separated, segregated and excluded, as aforesaid , and they, and adult interveners, and all parents and guardians of Negro children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, are discriminated against, as aforesaid, on the basis of and because of their race or color.' 21. It is impossible for infant interveners, or any other Negro child of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, or either or any of them, to secure or obtain public senior high school educational opportunities, advantages or facilities, including those hereinbefore specified, equal to those afforded and available to children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County who are not Negroes, or for adult interveners, or either or any of them, or any other parent or guardian of a Negro child or children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, to secure or obtain rights and privileges of sending their respective children to a public senior high school in said County with educational opportunities, advantages and facilities, including those herein­ before specified, equal to the educational opportunities, advantages and - 22 - �23 facilities afforded and available to children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County w h o are not Negroes, as long as defendants, or either of them, or their agents or employees, enforce or execute against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, the laws of the C o m m o n w e a l t h of Virginia specified in p aragraph 15 hereof, or either or any of then, or enforce, execute or pursue against t h e m the policy, practice, c u s t o m and usage specified in p aragraph 16 hereof, or in any other m a n n e r pursue any policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage of segregating students, on the basis of race or color, in the public senior high school educational opportunities, advantages and facilities afforded students residing in said County. Infant interveners, and other N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, can obtain equality of public senior high school educational opportunities, advantages and facilities in said County only if no distinction be m a d e on the basis of race or color in the consideration of applicants for admission as students to the public senior high school established, maintained and operated for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, and by the admission, e nrollm e n t and education of infant interveners, and all other N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, to and in any public senior high school establi shed, maintained and operated for children of public .school age ‘ Similarly situated residing in said County or any race, color or group, at the s a m e time, and under the s a m e t e r m s and conditions, and with the s a m e treatment, that children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any other race, color or group are admitted, enrolled, e d u ­ cated and given therein, whether or not the discriminations specified in p a r a ­ graph 17 hereof are eliminated. 22. T h e action of defendants, and each of them, in enforcing and executing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, or either or any of them, the laws of the C o m m o n w e a l t h of Virginia specified in para g r a p h 15 hereof, or either or any of them; and/or in otherwise acting pursuant to �24 said laws, or either or any of them, to preclude, on the basis of race or color, the admission, enrollment or education of infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said Gmnty, or either or any of them, to and in any public senior high school established, maintained or operated for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any race, color or group, at the s a m e time, and under the s a m e t e r m s and conditions, and with the s a m e treatment, that children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any other race, color or group are admitted, enrolled, educated and given therein; and/dr in enforcing, executing or pursuing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, the policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage specified in p a r a ­ graph 16 hereof, and/or in establishing, enforcing, executing or pursuing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age simi- ■ larly situated residing in said County, any other policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage which prohibits theqi, because of their race or color, f r o m attending the| only public senior high school of said County affording a senior high school education equal to that afforded all other qualified students w h o are not Negroes, and/or in establishing, enforcing, executing or pursuing against infant inter­ veners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of then, any other policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage which c o m p e l s them, because of their race or color, to attend the senior high school department of the segregated public school set apart forj N e g r o students in said County, and/or in establishing, enforcing, executing orj pursuing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school a g e similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, any other policy , practice, c u s t o m or usage m a k i n g any distinction, on the basis of race or color, in the consideration of any applicant for admission as a student to any public senior high school established, maintained or operated for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any race, color or group; and/or in establishing, enforcing executing or pursuing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age �25 similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, any other policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage which precludes the admission, enrollment or education of infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, to and in the public senior high school established, maintained or operated for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any race, color or group, at the s a m e time, and under the s a m e t e r m s and conditions, and with the s a m e treatment, that children of public school age similarly situated of any other race, color or group are admitted, enrolled, educated or given therein, and/or in enforcing, ■executing or pursuing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of thesm, the policy, practice, c u s t o m and usage hereinbefore specified in paragraph 17 hereof, of denying them, because of their race or color, public senior high school educational opportunities, advantages and facilities, including those hereinbefore specified, equal to the public senior high school opportunities, advantages, and facilities afforded and avail­ able to children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County w h o are not Negroes, and/or in establishing, enforcing, executing or pursuing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age s i m i ­ larly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, any other policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage of denying, or having the effect of denying, them, because of their race or color, public senior high school educational opportunities, advantages and facilities, including those hereinbefore specified, equal to the public senior high school educational opportunities, advantages and facilities afforded and available to children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County w h o are not Negroes; and/or in m a k i n g any dis­ tinction, on the basis of race or color, in the consideration of infant inter­ veners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated r e ­ siding in said County, or either or any of then, as an applicant for admission is a student to any public senior high school established, maintained or operated for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said �26 County of any race, color or group, and/or in denying, refusing, or in any w a y hindering, because of their race or color, infant interveners, or either or any of them, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, admission, enrollment, or education to and in any public senior high school established, maintained or operated for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any race, color or group, at the s a m e time, and under the s a m e t e r m s and conditions, and with the s a m e treatment, that children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any other race or group are ad­ mitted, enrolled, educated and given therein, denies infant interveners, and other N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, their privilege and immunities as citizens of the United States, their liberty and property without due process of law, and the equal protection of the laws, secured by the Fourteenth A m e n d m e n t of the Constitution of the United States, section 1, and the rights secured by Title 8, United States Code, section 41, and is for these reasons unconstitutional and void. 23. T h e action of defendants, and each of them, in enforcing, e x e c u ­ ting or pursuing against adult interveners, or any other parent or guardian of N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, or either or any of them, the policy, practice, c u s t o m and usage hereinbefore specified in para g r a p h 18 hereof, of denying them, b e ­ cause of their race or color and/or the race or color of their respective childdren, rights and privileges of sending their respective children to a public senior high school in said County with educational opportunities, advantages and facilities, including those hereinbefore specified, equal to the educational opportunities, advantages and facilities afforded and available to children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County w h o are not Negroes, or in establishing, enforcing executing or pursuing against adult interveners, or any other parent or guardian of N e g r o children of public school age similar­ ly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, any other policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage of denying, or having the effect of denying, them, because of their race or color and/or the race or color of their respective �27 children, rights and privileges of sending their respective dhildren t o a public senior high school in said County with educational opportunities, advantages and facilities, including those hereinbefore specified, equal to the educational opportunities, advantages and facilities afforded and available to children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County w h o are not Negroes, denies adult interveners, and other parents and guardians of N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, their privileges and immunities as citizens of the United States, their liberty and property without due process of law, and the equal protection of the laws, secured b y the Fourteenth A m e n d m e n t of the Constitution of the United States, section 1, and the rights secured b y Title 8, United States Code, section 41, and is for these reasons unconstitutional, and void. 24. Notwithstanding that the discriminations aforesaid have been of long standing, and have been the subject of complaint to defendants and their predecessors in office upon n u m e r o u s occasions in the past, and notwithstanding that it has been d e m a n d e d that defendants, and each of them, cease and desist therefrom, defendants, and each of them, continue to deny, because of their race or color, infant interveners, and all other N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, the right and privilege of attending the public senior high school established, maintained and operated for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County w h o are not Negroes, and refuse and fail to act favorably upon such requests or dema n d s , and will continue to refuse and fail to admit any of t h e m to any public senior high school established, maintained and operated exclusively for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County w h o are not Negroes, because of the laws of the C o m m o n w e a l t h of Virginia specified in p aragraph 15 hereof, and because of the policies, practices, c u s t o m s and usages specified in paragraphs 16 to 18, inclusive, hereof, and each defendant has continued and still continues to enforce and execute against infant inter­ veners, and all other N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, the laws of the C o m m o n w e a l t h of Virginia specified in p aragraph 15 hereof, and to enforce, execute and pursue against t h e m the �28 policies, practices, c u s t o m s and usages aforesaid, and has m a d e , and continues to m a k e , the aforesaid and other distinctions because of race or color in the opport unities, advantages and facilities provided by t h e m for the public senior high school education of children of school age residing in said County. 25. Defendants, and each of them, will continue to enforce and e x e ­ cute against infant interveners, and all other N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, the laws of the C o m m o n w e a l t h of Virginia specified in paragraph 15 hereof, and will continue to engage in other action pursuant to said laws, and will continue to pursue against t h e m the policies, practices, c u s t o m s and usages specified in p a ragraphs 16 to 18, inclusive, hereof, and will continue to deny t h e m admission, enrollment and education to and in any public senior high school established, maintained and operated for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County w h o are not Negroes, and will continue to discriminate against t h e m in the m a n n e r hereinbefore set forth unless restrained and enjoinec by this Court f r o m so doing. -26. Interveners, and those similarly situated and affected on wt^ise behalf this action is brought, are suffering irreparable injury and are threatened with irreparable injury in the future by reason of the laws, the policies, practices, c u s t o m s and usages, and the actions of defendants, herein complained of. T h e y have no plain, adequate or complete r e m e d y to redress th£ w r o n g s and illegal acts herein complained of other than this action for a declaratory judgment and an injunction. A n y other r e m e d y to w hich interveners and those similarly situated could be remitted would be attended by such u n ­ certainties and delay s as to deny substantial relief, would iqvtolve a multipli­ city of suits, and would cause further irreparable injury and occasion da m a g e , vexation and inconvenience, WHEREFORE, interveners respectfully pray that, upon the filing of this complaint as m a y appear prop e r and convenient to the Court: 1. T h e Court convene a three-judge District Court, as required by Title 28, United States Code, sections 2281 and 2284. �29 2. This Court advance this action on the docket and order a speedy hearing on this action according to law, and upon such hearing: . (a) This Court adjudge, decree and declare the rights and legal relations of the parties to the subject matter here in controversy in order that such declaration shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree. (b) This Court enter a judgment or decree declaring that the action of defendants, and each of the m, in enforcing or executing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, or either or any of them, the laws of the C o m m o n w e a l t h of Virginia hereinbefore specified in paragraph 15 hereof, or either or any of them, and any and all action which precludes, on the basis of race or color, the admission, enrollment or education of infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, to and in any public senior high school established, maintained or operated for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any race, color or group, at the s a m e time, and under the s a m e t e r m s and c o n ­ ditions, and with the s a m e treatment, that children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any other race, color or group are admitted, enrolled, educated and given therein, denies infant interveners, and all other N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, their privileges and immunities as citizens of the United States, their liberty and property with­ out due process of law, and, the equal protection of the laws, secured by the Fourteenth A m e n d m e n t of the Constitution of the United States, section 1, and the rights secured b y Title 8, United States Code, section 41, and is for these reasons unconstitutional and void. (c) This Court enter a judgment or decree declaring that the action of defendants, and each of them, in enforcing, executing or pursuing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, or either or any of them, the policy, practice, c u s t o m and usage hereinbefore specified in paragraph 16 hereof, or in establishing, enforcing, executing or pursuing aginst infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, any other policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage which prohibits them, because of their race or color, f r o m attending the only public senior high school of said County affording a senior high school education equal to that afforded all other qualified students w h o are not Negroes, or in establishing, e n ­ forcing, executing or pursuing against infant inter­ veners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, any policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage which c o m p e l s them, because of their race or color, to �30 attend a segregated public senior high school set apart for N e g r o students in said County, or in establishing, enforcing, executing or pursuing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, any other policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage m a k i n g any distinction, on the basis of race or color, in the consideration of any a p ­ plicant for admission as a student to any public senior high school established, maintained or operated for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any race, color or group, or in establishing, enforcing, executing or pursuing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, any other policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage w h ich precludes the admission, enrollment or education of them, or either or any of them, to and in any public senior high school established, maintained or operated for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any race, color or group, at the s a m e time, and under the s a m e t e r m s and conditions, and with the s a m e treatment, that children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any other, race, color or group are admitted, enrolled, educated and given therein, denies infant interveners, and other N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, their privileges and immunities, as citizens of the United States, their liberty and property without due process of law, and the equal protection of the laws, secured b y the Fourteenth A m e n d m e n t of the Constitution ^of the United States, section 1, and the rights secured by Title 8, United States Code, section 41, and is therefore unconstitutional and void. 9 (d) This Court enter a judgment or decree declaring that the action of defendants, or either of t h e m in m a k i n g any dis­ tinction, on the basis of race or color, in the consideration of infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, or either or any of them, as an applicant for a d ­ mission as a student to any public senior high school esta­ blished, maintained or operated for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any race, color or group, or in denying, refusing, or in any w a y hinder­ ing, because of their race or color, infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, admission, enrollment or education to and in any public senior high school established, maintained or operated for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any race, color or group, at the s a m e time, and under the s a m e terms, and conditions, and with the s a m e treatment, that children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County or any other race, color or group are admitted, enrolled, educated and given therein, denies infant interveners, and all other N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, their privileges and immunities as citizens of the United States, their liberty and property without due process of law, and the equal protection of the laws, secured by the Fourteenth A m e n d m e n t of the Constitution of the United States, section 1 and the rights secured b y Title 8, United States Code, section 41, and is for these reasons unconstitutional and void. �31 (e) This Court enter a judgment or decree declaring that the action of defendants, or either of them, in enforcing, executing, or pursuing against adult interveners, or any other parent or guardian of N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, or either or any of thejn, the policy, practice, c u s t o m and usage hereinbefore speci­ fied in p aragraph 18 hereof, of denying them, because of their race or color and/or the race or color of their respective children, rights and privileges of sending their respective children to a public senior high school in said County with educational opportuni­ ties, advantages and facilities, including those h e r e ­ inbefore specified, equal to the educational opportuni­ ties, advantages and facilities afforded and available to children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County w h o are not Negroes, or in establishing, enforcing, executing or pursuing against adult interveners, or any other parent or guardian of N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either of any of them, any other policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage of denying, ar having the effect of denying, them, because of their race or color and/or the race or color of their respective children rights and privilege of sending their respective children to any public senior high school in said County with educational opportunities, advantages and facilities, including those hereinbefore specified, equal to the educational opportunities, advantages and facilities afforded and available to children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County w h o are not Negroes, denies adult interveners, and other parents and guardians of N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, their privileges and immunities as citizens of the United States, their liberty and property without due process of law, and the equal protection of the laws, secured by the Fourteenth A m e n d m e n t of the Constitution of the United States, section 1, and the rights secured b y Title 8, United States Code, section 41, and is for these reasons unconstitutional and void. (f) This Court enter a p e r m a n e n t injunction perpetually restaining and enjoining defendants, and each of them, their successors in office, and their agents and employees, forthwith, f r o m enforcing or executing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in the C ounty of Arlington, Virginia, or either or any of them, the laws of the C o m m o n w e a l t h of Virginia h e r e ­ inbefore specified in p aragraph 15 hereof, or either or any of them, and f r o m any and all action pursuant to said laws, or either or any of them, w h ich precludes, on the basis of race or color, the admission, enroll­ m e n t or education of infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, to and in any public senior high school established, m a i n ­ tained or operated for childrep of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any race. �32 color or group, at the s a m e time, and under the s a m e t e r m s and conditions, and with the s a m e treatment, that children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any other race, color or group are admitted, enrolled, educated and given therein, upon the ground that such laws deny infant interveners, and all other N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, their privileges and immunities as citizens of the United States, their liberty and prop erty without due process of law, and the equal protection of the laws, secured by the F o u r ­ teenth A m e n d m e n t of the Constitution of the United States, section 1, and the rights secured by Title 8, United States Code, section 41. (g) ' This Court enter a p e r m a n e n t injunction perpetually restraining and enjoining defendants, and each of them, their successors in office, and their agents and employees, forthwith, f r o m enforcing, executing or pursuing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in the County of Arlington, Virginia, or either or any of them, the policy, practice, c u s t o m and usage herein­ before specified in paragraph 16 hereof, and f r o m establishing, enforcing, executing or pursuing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, any other policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage w h ich prohibits then, because of their race or color, f r o m attending the only public senior high school of said County affording a secondary E d u ­ cation equal to that afforded all other qualified students w h o are not Negroes, and f r o m establishing, enforcing, executing or pursuing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, any other policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage which c o m p e l s them, because of their race or color, to attend a segregated public senior . high school set apart for N e g r o students in said County, and f r o m establishing, enforcing, executing or pursuing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, any other policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage m a k i n g any distinction, on the basis of race or color, in the consideration of any applicant for admission as a student to any public senior high s chool established, maintained or operated for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any race, color or groip, or in establishing, enforcing, executing or pursuing against infant interveners, or any other N e g r o child of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, any other policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage w hich precludes the admission, enroll­ m e n t or education of them, or either or any of them, to and in any public senior high school established, maintained or operated for children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County of any race, color or groupi at the s a m e time, and under the s a m e t e r m s and conditions, and with the s a m e treatment , that children of public school age similarly situated �33 r e s i d in g in s a id C ounty of any o th e r r a c e , c o lo r o r g ro u p a r e a d m itte d , e n r o lle d , e d u c a te d and giv en th e r e in , upon th e g ro u n d th a t s u c h p o lic ie s , p r a c t i c e s , c u s to m s and u s a g e s , and e a c h of th e m , deny in f a n t .i n t e r v e n e r s , and o th e r N e g ro c h ild r e n of p u b lic s c h o o l ag e s i m il a r ly s itu a te d r e s i d in g in s a id C ounty, t h e i r p r i v il e g e s and im m u n itie s a s c itiz e n s of th e U n ited S ta te s , t h e i r lib e r ty a n d p r o p e r ty w ith o u t due p r o c e s s of law , and th e e q u a l p ro te c tio n of the la w s, s e c u r e d by th e F o u r ­ te e n th A m e n d m e n t of th e C o n fu ta tio n of the U nited S ta te s , s e c ti o n 1, a n d the r i g h ts s e c u r e d by T itle 8, U n ited S ta te s C o d e , s e c tio n 41, and a r e t h e r e f o r e u n c o n s titu tio n a l and v o id , (h) T h is C o u rt e n te r a p e r m a n e n t in ju n c tio n p e r p e tu a lly r e s t r a i n i n g a n d e n jo in in g d e fe n d a n ts , and e a c h of t h e m , t h e i r s u c c e s s o r s in o ffic e , and t h e i r a g e n ts and e m p lo y e e s , fo rth w ith , fr o m m a k in g any d is tin c tio n , on th e b a s i s of r a c e o r c o lo r , in the c o n s id e r a tio n of in fa n t i n te r v e n e r s , o r any o th e r N e g ro c h ild s i m il a r ly s itu a te d r e s i d in g in th e C ounty of A rlin g to n , V irg in ia ! o r e it h e r o r any of th e m , a s a n a p p lic a n t f o r a d m i s s io n a s a s tu d e n t to any p u b lic s e n i o r h ig h s c h o o l e s ta b lis h e d , m a in ta in e d o r o p e ra te d f o r c h ild r e n of p u b lic s c h o o l age s i m il a r ly s itu a te d r e s id in g in s a id C ounty of any r a c e , c o lo r o r g ro u p , and fro m d e n y in g , r e fu s in g , o r in any w ay h in d e rin g , b e c a u s e of t h e i r r a c e o r c o lo r , in fa n t i n te r v e n e r s , o r any o th e r N e g ro c h ild of p u b lic s c h o o l age s i m il a r ly s itu a te d r e s id in g in s a id C ounty, o r e it h e r o r any of th e m , a d m is s io n , e n r o llm e n t o r e d u c a tio n to and in any p u b lic s e n i o r h ig h s c h o o l e s ta b lis h e d , i m a in ta in e d o r o p e r a te d fo r c h ild r e n of p u b lic s c h o o l age s i m i l a r l y s itu a te d r e s i d in g in s a id C ounty of any r a c e , c o lo r o r g ro u p , a t th e s a m e tim e , and u n d e r th e s a m e t e r m s and c o n d itio n s , and w ith th e s a m e tr e a tm e n t, th a t c h ild r e n o f p u b lic sc h o o l age s i m il a r ly s itu a te d r e s i d in g in s a id C ounty of any o th e r r a c e , c o lo r o r g ro u p a r e a d m itte d , e n r o lle d , e d u c a te d and g iv e n t h e r e in upon th e g ro u n d th a t s u c h a c tio n d e n ie s in fa n t i n t e r ­ v e n e r s , a n d o th e r N e g ro c h ild r e n s i m il a r ly s itu a te d r e s i d in g in s a id C o u n ty , t h e i r p r i v il e g e s and im m u n itie s a s c it i z e n s of th e U n ited S ta te s , t h e i r l ib e r t y and p r o p e r t y w ith o u t due p r o c e s s of law , and th e e q u a l p r o ­ te c tio n of th e la w s , s e c u r e d by th e F o u r te e n th A m e n d ­ m e n t of th e C o n s titu tio n of th e U n ite d S ta te s , s e c tio n 1, and th e r i g h ts s e c u r e d by T itle 8, U n ited S ta te s C ode, s e c tio n 41, and i s f o r th e s e r e a s o n s u n c o n s titu tio n a l a n d v o id . (i) T h is C o u rt e n t e r a p e r m a n e n t in ju n c tio n p e r p e tu a lly r e s tr a in in g a n d e n jo in in g d e fe n d a n ts , and e a c h of th e m , t h e i r s u c c e s s o r s in o ffic e , and t h e i r a g e n ts and e m p lo y e e s , fo rth w ith , fro m e n fo rc in g , e x e c u tin g o r p u r s u in g a g a in s t a d u lt i n te r v e n e r s , o r any o th e r p a r e n t o r g u a rd ia n of N e g ro c h ild r e n of p u b lic s c h o o l a g e s i m il a r ly s itu a te d r e s i d in g in th e C ounty of A rlin g to n , V irg in ia , o r e it h e r o r any of th e m , the p o lic y , p r a c t i c e , c u s to m and u s a g e h e r e in b e f o r e s p e c if ie d in p a r a g r a p h 18 h e r e o f , of d e n y in g th e m , b e c a u s e of t h e i r r a c e o r c o lo r , a n d / o r th e r a c e o r c o lo r of t h e i r r e s p e c t iv e c h ild r e n , r i g h ts and p r i v il e g e s o f se n d in g t h e i r r e s p e c t iv e c h il d ­ r e n to a p u b lic s e n i o r h ig h s c h o o l ip s a id C ounty w ith �34 educational opportunities, advantages and facilities including those hereinbefore specified, equal to the educational opportunities, advantages and facilities afforded and available to children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County w h o are not Negroes, and f r o m establishing, enforcing, executing or pursuing against adult interveners, or any other parent or guardian of N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, or either or any of them, any other policy, practice, c u s t o m or usage of denying, or having the effect of denying, them, because of their race or color and/or the race or color of their respective children, rights and privileges of sending their respective children to a public senior high school in said County with e d u c a ­ tional opportunities, advantages and facilities, in­ cluding those hereinbefore specified, equal to the educational opportunities, advantages and facilities afforded and available to children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County w h o are not Negroes, upon the ground that such policies, practices, c u s t o m s and usages, and each of them, deny adult inter­ veners, and other parents and guardians of N e g r o children of public school age similarly situated residing in said County, their privileges and immunities as citizens of the United States, their liberty and property without due process of law, and the equal protection of the laws, secured by the Fourteenth A m e n d m e n t of the Constitution of the United States, section 1, and the rights secured b y Title 8, United States Code, section 41, and is for these reasons unconstitutional and void. (j) This Court allow interveners their costs herein, and grant such further, other, additional or alternative relief as m a y appear to the Court to be equitable and just in the premises. /s/ Oliver W . Oliver W . 623 North Richmond /s/ Martin A. Martin A. 626 North Richmond, Hill Hill Third Street 19, Virginia Martin_____ Martin Third Street Virginia /s/ Spottswood W . Robinson, III Spotiswood W . Robinson, III 623 North Third Street R i c h m o n d 19, Virginia /s/ L e o n A. R a n s o m L e o n A. R a n s o m 1939 Thirteenth Street, N. W . Washington, D. C. Counsel for Interveners. � https://projectdaps.org/files/original/a43f032f11575f00ce9b182f7c74a5ac.jpg 37341e294650ee42bc6dd583f871107e Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource RG 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Civil Action No. 331 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Columbia, Alexandria Division Description An account of the resource Move for applicants to intervene as plaintiffs in addition to Constance Carter in Civil Action 331 against the School Board of Arlington County. 34 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Counsel for Interveners, Oliver W. Hill; Martin A. Martin; Spottswood W. Robinson, III; Leon A. Ranson Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant unknown (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. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_2_1 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/dc5cf6d45ca4419f5f855d291c69f42e.pdf bf843f18432cae2e57653dd068b13c54 PDF Text Text Committee to Study Probloaa of Integration In the Arlington Public Schools Appointed June 12, 195^ Chalrsrans Sr, Joseph 0. McCa.skill, U6^k Ho, 26th St., -----Offloes EH 7-1820, Ext. V*76 Ball, Prank L., Sr. Burton, Mrs. B. A. Bavin, Mrs. A. J. E. Poster, Bev. William H. Prisbie. Alfred E. Groom, Col. J. Puller Hanoook, George Holland, Edwin I. Jacobs, Mrs. Haskell Johnson, Sr. Harold MaoPheraon, Mrs. Colin C. Pollard, Joooo Higdon, Mrs. James S. Schwarts, Br. Haymond Shirley, Mrs. Mary Sweeney, Claude A. Taylor, Theodore V. Tuthill, Br. Curtis E. Watt, Mrs. William G. IU37 Ho. Court House Ed. 9TO Ho. Livingston St. 5210 Ho. 27th St. 1106 Ho. Inglewood St. 636 So. 25 th St. 206 Badio Building 3^iO So. 22»d St. 2926 Columbia Pika 6 teh Ho. 26th St. 2901 Ho. Lexington St. 6201 Ho. ISth Boad ljlh So. Poe St. h223 Ho. 2nd Boad 1301 Ho. Highland St. 1962 Ho. Culpepper St. 1726 Ho. Cameron St. 706 Ho. Frederick St. 5612 Ho. 2hth St. 1600 Ho, Highland St. Staff Members: Blue, Victor, Jr. Halstead, Mrs. Eathor Lambert, Miss Lillian Loving, Miss Sally Blehordson, George Wolfo, Miss Lena 9517 So. Uth Street 2«52 So. Lowell St. 625 Ho. Emerson St. 5617 Ho. Washington Blvd. 2h21 So. Lowell St. 1763 Queen’ Lens s � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource RG 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Committee to Study Problems of Integration in the Arlington Public Schools Appointed June 12, 1954 Description An account of the resource List of members and respective addresses of appointed members to the committee Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Committee to Study Problems of Integration in the Arlington Public Schools Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954-6-12 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_5_1 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/9ba50f2c59c8b0d5ce52286dbb3bb6ca.pdf 4fb44ddc08134a64abc982e171167f82 PDF Text Text Qjl [C •— Committee to Study Problems of Integration', in the, Arlington Public Schools Appointed June 12, 1954 by Mrs. Elizabeth P. Campbell, Chairman, Arlington School Board, and T. Edward Rutter, Superintendent of Schools Prank L. Ball, Sr., 1437 North Court House Road, senator. Attorney, former State Victor Blue, Jr.r 5517 South 4th Street, Health and physical education teacher at Wakefield junior-senior high school. Rev. Jackson A. Browne, 2706 24th Road, South. Immediate past president of the Arlington Ministerial Association} minister of Lomax A.M.E. Zion Church, Mrs. R. A. Burton, 940 North Livingston Street. Association of University Women, — Jofronh ■ H.-'Cagmz6133„Hcacth 12th Street. Washington builder-;—^ 3 Member of the American Employed by Edward R. Carr. Inc., Dr. Claire Christman. 1S00 North Edison Street. school health services. Mrs. A. J. E. Davis, 5210 North 27th Street. Arlington Council of Church Women, Director, Arlington public First vice-president of the Rev. William H. Foster, 1106 North Inglewood Street, Presbyterian Church. /'''Alfred E. Friable, 6 3 6 25th Street, South, the Arlington County Board. 2„0ol. J. Fuller Groom, 206 Radio Building. Northern Virginia Real Estate Board. Broker, former chairman of Realtor and member of the Mrs. Esther Halstead. 2452 South Lowell Street. . ggKooI."""'— Pastor of Trinity Teacher at Drew Elementary George Hancock, Executive Secretary, Veterans1 Memorial YMCA, 3 4 4 0 22nd Street, South. {.J!dwin T. Holland, President, Old Dominion Bank, 2926 Columbia Pike. Mrs. Haskell Jacobs, 6424 North 26th Street, Immediate past vice-president of the Women's League, Arlington-Fairfax Jewish Center. S~- �Committee to Study Problems of Integration in the Arlington Public Schools - 2 . (P Dr. Harold Johnson, 2901 Worth Lexington Street. Physician and chair­ man of the Board of Managers, Veterans' Memorial XM3A. Miss__Lillian Lambert^ 625 North Emerson Street. Elementary School, Principal of Fairiington Miss Sally Loving^5817 Worth Washington Boulevard. at-Washington-Lee high school. s. Colin C. MacPherson, 6201 - 18th Road, Worth, Virginia Council of Republican Women. Social studies teacher Former president of the Joseph C. MeCaskill, 4-634- 26th Street, North. Vice-chairman of the board of directors of the Arlington YMCA. Staff assistant to the Assistant Secretary of the Interior. Jesse Pollard, 1314- South Poe Street, Architects president of the HoffmanBoston Parent-Teacher Association. George Richardson. 2421 South Lowell Street, Principal of Hoffmah-Boston elementary-arid junior-senior high schools. Mrs. James D. Rigdon, 4223 - 2nd Road, North. Former president of the Northern Virginia Deanery of Catholic Women. Raymond Schwartz, 1301 North Highland Street. Arlington Hospital. (IfJ * Mrs. Mary Shirley, 1962 North Culpepper Street. retired school teacher. Chief of Medicine, Former secretary, NAACP? Ilaude A. Sweeney, 1726 North Cameron Street. Army Post Office Department| vice-president of the Langston Citizens1 Association. £J£hbodore W. Taylor, 706 North Frederick .'Street. Management specialist in the United States Indian Service^ Arlington County Council, P.T.A. Dr. Curtis E. Tuthill, 5612 North 24th Street. Member of the faculty at George Washington University and former member, Arlington School Board. &. William G. Watt, 1600 North Highland Street. Newly elected vice-presi­ dent of the Virginia Federation of Women’s Clubs. Miss Lena Wolfe, 1763 Queen’s Lane. Principal, Swanson junior high school. �7 * b '2-2-3 * L-t /?s-y � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource RG 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Committee to Study Problems of Integration in the Arlington Public Schools Appointed June 12, 1954 by Mrs. Elizabeth P. Campbell and T. Edward Rutter Description An account of the resource Annotated list of names, respective addresses, and employers of appointed members to the committee. 3 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Committee to Study Problems of Integration in the Arlington Public Schools Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954-6-12 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_5_2 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/ca99c1e109a4bec19e4737e664ba7075.pdf 621c7b205543f46719ef682216460b40 PDF Text Text Minutes of Meeting of Committee to Study Problems of Integration in the Arlington Schools October 18, 1954 (Approved by Dr. McCaskill and Mrs. Campbell.) The second meeting of the Committee to Study Problems of Integration in the Arlington Schools was held at 8 p.m., October 18, at the School Administration Building, with Dr. J. C. McCaskill, chairman, presiding. Roll call showed the following members present: Victor Blue, Jr., Mrs. R. A. Burton, Joseph I . Carr, William I Parker, representing Dr. Claire Christman, Mrs. A. J. 3 . Davis, Rev. William I . Poster, Alfred E. Prisbie, Col. J. Puller Groom, t firs. Esther Halstead, George Hancock, Mrs. Haskell Jacobs, Dr. Harold Johnson, Miss Lillian Lambert, Miss Sally Loving, Jes3e Pollard, George Richardson, Mrs. James D. Higdon, firs. Mary Shirley, Claude A. Sweeney, Mrs. William G. Watt, Miss Lena Wolfe. Present from the school board were Mrs. Edmund D. Campbell, chairman, and Warren Cos; from the school adminis­ tration, T. Edward Rutter, Superintendent; Dr. C. Glen Ilass, Charles J. Walsh, Stanley V. Smith and Mrs. Art Brown. After roll call and approval of the minutes of the June 23 meeting of the committee. Dr. McCaskill reported that ho had previously called together a snail group of members of the committee, the school staff and the school board to plan the agenda for this meeting. At Dr. McCaskill's request, the mem­ bers approved the agenda as follows: 1. Report by firs. Campbell of discussion at a meeting in Warrenton of school board members from northern Virginia. 2. Report by Mr. Rutter of state developments. 3. Report by Mrs. Burton on findings of the sub-committee on research, appointed by action of the entire Inte­ gration committee. �- 2 - Dp . McCastei.il then said he wished the committee to consider whether it would be desirable to issue a "fact sheet* for community distribution in Arlington concerning integration. In Mrs. Campbell’s report she explained that the 41 school board members from northern Virginia who attended the Varrenton conference are much concerned about the situation with regard to segregation or integration, because the indi­ vidual boards are the ones who must deal with the problem and who will be held responsible in each community for what is done. "There was general agreement at the Varrenton meeting," Mrs. Campbell said, "that there is need for local option in the natter of integration, since Virginia communities vary so much in their proportion of white and Negro public school pupils and also in the general conditions existing in the communities." Mrs. Campbell said she is hopeful that Virginia edu­ cational authorities will ask for suggestions from school board members when the time comes to deal with natters of integration. She also said there is need for action as soon as possible after the Supreme Court announces how and when they wish integration to be pat into effect. Mr. Rutter, in his report on the state-wide situation, told of a meeting of school superintendents from northern coun­ ties and cities of Virginia. "The school superintendents took the position," Mr. Rutter said, "that nothing should be done to impair the public school system of the state." Mr. Rutter then reported on the ruling by Virginia's Attorney General that the Virginia Constitution and State Code provisions providing for sogregation of the races in the public schools is still in force. Ue also reported on instructions received by all superintendents in the state to conduct the schools this year on a segregated basis. Other developments reported by Mr. Rutter were these: Statement by Governor Stanley that ho intends to retain segre­ gation in Virginia schools, poll of Virginia legislators showing desire to retain segregation, appointment by Governor Stanley of a commission from the General Assembly to frame a state policy on the issue of segregation, and the announcement of the first public bearing by this commission to be held November 15. �- 3 - It was also reported that Attorney General Almond of Virginia will present a brief at the hearing before the Supreme Court in Washington on December 6. Mr. Rutter pointed out that Arlington schools receive funds from both the state and the federal government, and that local oommunities will be in a difficult situation if the state and federal authorities disagree on the matter of inte­ gration in the schools. The roport by fire. Burton of the sub-committee on re­ search included the following: 1. A "fact sheet" on integration would be of value but should be limited absolutely to facts, with no matters of opinion or emotion included. 2. Kits might be prepared by the Integration Committee for use by speakers and organizations desiring infor­ mation. 3. If Arlington schools wish to hold seminars similar to those held in the District of Columbia last year to help teachers prepare for integration, the American Friends Service Committee is willing to direct such seminars. Mrs. Burton's report told of th© situation in many oommunities where integration is being Instituted or has been in effect. She mentioned the wide newspaper coverage in troubled areas and said: "It is to be hoped that some responsible news gathering agency will later give us a detailed, factual report of the successes as well as the failures." After completion of the scheduled items on the agenda, Alfred E. Frisbie moved that the Integration committee recommend to the school board that a factual reporting 3heet be issued at intervals as needed, outlining the various steps in the move toward integration and that this reporting sheet make no attempt to interpret what has been done. Rev. William 1 . Foster seconded the motion which was 1 passed unanimously. �- 4 - There was some discussion concerning how often future meetings of the committee should bo held. Reverend Poster ex­ pressed the opinion that the entire community needs to be given information concerning the integration problem, and made a motion that regular monthly meetings be held. Br. Johnson seconded the motion and it was passed. Mrs. Campbell told the members of the committee: "The members of our Arlington school board want to do the best they can in the matter of integration. It strengthens us to have this committee advise us." � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource RG 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Minutes of Meeting of Committee to study Problems of Integration in Arlington Schools October 18, 1954 Description An account of the resource Minutes from the second meeting of the committee on October 18, 1954. 4 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Committee to Study Problems of Integration in the Arlington Public Schools Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954-10-18 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_5_4 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/4c0df2835db061d24c6e8e3ce6ee78ee.pdf 6a10c650c0c7d4a65843b0b9bdffba3a PDF Text Text A R L IN G T O N C O U N T Y P U B L IC S C H O O L S Office of the Superintendent 1-426 n o r t h Q uincy s tr e e t telephone: jackson A rlington 7. V irginia April 21, 1955 To: Members of the Committee Studying Problems of Integration in the Arlington Public Schools Prom: Mrs. Edmund Campbell,, Chairman of the Arlington School Board and Joseph C. McCaskill, Chairman, Integration Committee This is to remind you of the meeting of the Integration Committee, to be held this coming Monday evening, April 25, at 8 p.m., for which you re­ ceived a notice a few weeks ago. Please note, however, a change in place. The committee will meet at Hoffman-Boston high school, 1^15 South Q,ueen Street. As you know, HoffmanBoston is Arlington1s modern high school for colored students. Another change for this meeting is that the social hour will come at the beginning. Our committee has been invited to meet a dozen white and negro educators who will be at Hoffman-Boston next week to evaluate the school in preparation for its final accreditation by the Southern Associa­ tion of Secondary Schools and Colleges. Refreshments, buffet style, will be served from 8 to 8:3Q p.m., to our committee, to the visiting educators, to the Hoffman-Boston faculty, and to members of the School Board. Those present will be introduced to the entire group. Our business meeting will be held at 8:^5 p.JB. and will adjourn by 10 p.m. The Integration Committee meeting at Hoffman-Boston next Monday eve­ ning is part of a program of information which the School Board wishes to present to the Integration Committee. We have previously met at WashingtonLee and we hope later to meet at Wakefield, so the committee members may get to see each of our three high schools. We sincerely hope you can attend. To get to Hoffman-Boston: Remember the date — next Monday evening, April 25 at HoffmanBoston. Turn south off Columbia Pike at South Rolfe Street. Go two blocks to 13th Road; then left one block to Queen Street. Go one-half block right on Queen Street to the school. 2-7700 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource RG 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Arlington County Public Schools Office of the Superintendent April 21, 1955 memo to the Members of the Committee Studying Problems of Integration in the Arlington Public Schools Description An account of the resource Memo to the committee from Elizabeth Campbell, Chairman of the Arlington School Board and Joseph C. McCaskill, Chairman, Integration Committee regarding an upcoming meeting of the Integration Committee Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Elizabeth Campbell and Joseph C. McCaskill Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1955-4-21 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_5_8 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/7383e9983c5fe81d9e8e7ba94ef90519.pdf b10a7d8f8ae2ebb032717ad7ab91628f PDF Text Text B eesaber 1 5 , 195** M inutes o f A rlington, O o g aittaa To Study Problem® o f I n te g r a tio n A r e g u la r e a s tin g o f th e In te g r a tio n O o sa itto e was held" a t 8 p .su Deeenher 1 5 , 195U In th e o f f ic e o f I . Edward S u t t e r , A rlin g to n S u p e rin te n d en t o f S chools, OOKBlttee aerabore p re s e n t wars D r, Jo sep h C. KcOaskillo chairm an, p r e s id in g , Mrs. S„ A. B a rto n , Dr, Clair® C h r ls ta s a , A lfre d E , I V is b ie , Col, ,1, F u l l e r Croon, Mr*, E s th e r H a lste a d , Georg® Hanoocfc, Mise M i l l e r . l e e b e r t . M iss S a lly lo v in g , Jo n es P o lla r d , George R ich ard so n , B r. Reyaond Schw arts and Claude; A, Sweeney. A le s p re s e n t wore Mrs, Edmund Campbell, D r, 1 . Clark® K eatin g „ Dr, X, E , D ra lie is and Warroa Cor froE th e School Board, S u p erin ten d en t R a tt e r , pd Mr*. A rt Brown, s e c re ta r y o f th e o o n a itta s , 1!b» u in n te o o f th e p re v io u s s e a tin g , a s n a ile d t o osoh c o rae ittae n e n h e r, wore approved w ith o u t b e in g re a d . AS th o f i r s t item o f b u s in e s s , th e chairm an asked f o r a n e v a lu a tio n o f th e Ifeot Sheet a s t o c o n te n t and d i s t r i b u t i o n . Mrs, Brown re p o rte d on th e d i s t r i b u t i o n sb fo llo w s; Croups r e g u la r ly re c e iv in g th e P a c t Sheet in clu d e th e fo llo w in g ; 1. 2. 3. b. 5» 6. 7. S, 5, P r e s id e n ts o f P a re n t-T e a c h e r A s so c ia tio n s in A rlin g to n P u b lic Schools Motiboi'a of oohool A dvisory Committees E d ito r s of A rlin g to n P a re n t-T e a c h e r A sso c ia tio n b u l le t in s A ll to a e h s r s , p r i n c i p a l s , o u p srv lg o ra aad msmbera of tho a d m in is tra tiv e e t a f f i n th e A rlin g to n sc h o o ls, Member* o f th e A rlin g to n d e le g a tio n to th e V irg in ia S ta te Assembly Meobers o f th e County Board and th e County Manager A rlin g to n p u b lic l i b r a r i e s Oongrusoaian J o e l 5 , B ro y h ill Herabsrs o f th e Committee t o Study Probleras o f I n te g r a tio n in the A rlington 3choole 'is a d d itio n t o t h i s , th e A rlin g to n leag u e o f Woaen T o te re hae r e ­ c e iv e d 25 c o p ie s of each o f th e two leo n e s o f th e E a st S h e e t. A number o f in d iv id u a l o itl s c n e have asked f o r c o p ie s and a few secondary school o la a e e s have re q u e ste d c o p ie s . 1 he Claremont P a re n t-T ea c h er A e so c ia tlo n planned to d u p lio a te 600 c o p ie s f o r t h e i r member*, th e W akefield h ig h school pap er r e - p r i n t e d more th an one (d a m n of in fo rm a tio n from th e Toot S h e e t. I t was th e o p inion o f th e oo aratttse t h a t th e School Beard should n o t is s u e th e Eact Sheet i n any la r g e e d it i o n , b u t t h a t o rg a n is a tio n s wish­ in g t o d i s t r i b u t e I t t o t h s l r own members should have tits in fo rm a tio n d u p li­ c a te d a t i h e l r own expense. S r . Schw arts m entioned t h a t he b e lie v e s th e m a te ria l which has appeared in th e P a c t Sheet i s a lre a d y f a s t l i a r to p a rso n s I n te r e s te d in th e p ro b le a o f in te g ra tio n �e — lira, S a r to s p o in te d out t h a t th a in fo rm a tio n In th e P a c t Sheet 1* e x tre m e ly v a lu a b le . “ I t would tak a hours o f work t o g e t t h i s in fo rm a tio n I f va d id a o t h a re I t oondensed In th a a c c u ra te form in which I t appears In the P a c t S h e e t,” M rs. B arto n s e ld , " I t w i l l he o f In c re a sin g im portance to h a re th o se f a c t a a v a ila b le when th e Supreme C ourt d e c is io n la made." Bra McCngfclll th en asked i f th e committee would c are t o sponsor a t l e a s t one se m l-p a h llo m eeting t o a c q u a in t le a d e r s in A rlin g to n w ith the e n t i r e s i t u a t i o n re g a rd in g s e g re g a tio n o f the ra c e s in th e A rlin g to n schools and th e problem s r e l a t i n g to in te g r a tio n . A fte r soma d ieo u e eio n th e committee members agreed not to epsnsor such a s a e tln g . I n s te a d , th e . fo llo w in g m otion, made by Mr. T ria b le was p a sse d unanim ously; “I move th a t t h i s comm ittee su g g est t o th a School Board t h a t i t would he good b u sin e ss f o r th s Board and members o f th e A d m in is tra tiv e s t a f f to appear b e fo re th e v a rio u s B e rrio s c lu b s and o th e r o rg a n is a tio n s of i t s choice t o o i t a th e f a c t s up t o and In c lu d in g th e p re s e n t day concerning s e g re g a tio n and i n te g r a tio n In A rlin g to n p u b lic sc h o o ls," S u p e rin te n d en t R u tte r th e n gave a r e p o rt f o r th e p a s t f iv e y e a rs showing ;he i n t e r - r e l a t i o n between l o c a l , s t a t e , and f e d e r a l fu n d s in su p p o rtin g th e schools o f A rlin g to n . A com parison o f th e se f i g u r e s f o r th e school y e a r 1950*51 w ith th o se o f th e p re s e n t f i s c a l y e a r , i s a s fo llo w s: Pram lo c a l ta x a t io n , A rlin g to n sch o o ls r e o s ir e d $2,772,16^ f iv e y e a rs a g e , and $5,U69,882 t h i s y e a r. Prom th e s t a t e o f T ir g l n l a , A rlin g to n re c e iv e d $712»*>75 i n 1950-51i and $1,116,725 t h i s y e a r . S h is was baaed on average d a ily a tte n d an c e in our (schools; rolm bursem snt on school bus t r a n s p o r ta tio n ; p a r t i a l payment of th s s a l a r i e s o f th e su p e rin te n d e n t o f s c h o o ls, th e d lr o o to r o f i n s t r u c t i o n , h e lp in g ts a o h e r s , and members o f th e su p e rv iso ry s t a f f ; s u b s id ie s f o r horns economics and v o c a tio n a l e d u c a tio n , f o r purchase of t e x t books, and f o r o p e ra tio n o f th e tsa o h e rs* sio k le a v e p la n . from f e d e r a l so u rc e s , A rlin g to n r e o e lr s d $289,188 in 1950*51• oud Of t h i s sum, $600,000 w i l l come to A rlin g to n t h i s y e a r under P u b lio law 815, which p ro v id e s f o r F e d e ra l A ssis­ tan c e f o r m aintenance and o p e ra tio n o f sch o o ls In a community w ith a la rg e In c re a se ,n p o p u la tio n doe to f e d e r a l a c t i v i t y . The rem ainder o f the fe d e r a l a llo tm e n t t o A rlin g to n l a from th e school lu n ch su b sid y o f $62,000 and a pay­ ment o f $h,000 in l i e u o f ta x s e on f e d e r a ll y owned p ro p e rty in th e c ounty. $666,000 ?or th e p re s e n t school y e a r . I. summary s h e e t o f th e f ig u r e s g iv en by Mr. R u tta r i s a tta c h e d . i t was a ls o p o in te d out th a t under P u b lio Lav S j h , a f e d e r a l appro­ p r i a t i o n o f $1,730,000 was giv en t o A rlin g to n toward th e o o n s tru e tlo n o f b llx la m e b trg J u n io r h ig h school and $580,000 to b u ild Tuckahoe elem entary sohool. There was some d la o u s tlo a es to w hether th e fig u r e s giv en by Mr, R u tte r should be in clu d e d l a a coming Paot S h e e t, b u t i t was th e o p in io n t h a t I t l a s o t y e t th » t l a s t o p u b lis h th e s e f ig u r e s . ''the iuseting adjourned. D e lls Brown, S e c re ta ry � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource RG 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource December 15, 1954 Minutes of the Arlington Committee to Study Problems of Integration Description An account of the resource Meeting minutes from the December 15 meeting at the office of T. Edward Rutter, Arlington Superintendent of Schools. 2 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Committee to Study Problems of Integration in the Arlington Public Schools Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954-12-15 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_5_10 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/a0c85ec8260184305d5e5ae7ff14e138.pdf e949d86ef0a27eedf2d0ccd43371e142 PDF Text Text I moors or oteojuticb o h i t s Kssrcra, ohte , mss 22, 1955 The Oomslttee to Study Problems of Integration In the Arlington School* M t at Si20 p.a., Jana 22, at the School Administration Building, with Dr. Joseph 0. HoCasklll, chairmen, presiding. She minute* of the previous meeting vsrs approved. Members present, In addition to th* chairman* vers Victor Blue, Mrs. Edith Burton, Dr^tflalre Christman, Hr*. A. J. E/^Bayis, Bsv. William Ho foster, AlfredJT Trlsbio, Mrs. Esther Halstead,JU A > St. Holland, / Sr. Harold JohzfaonK'filis Mlllatt/Lambert, Jesse Folfdrd, George Biohartfson Claude i. Sweeps';Theodore W. Xuylor and Mrs. W l j p i 0. Watt. i^Lt Suporintendoat of Schools 9. Edvard Butter, Sr. Stanley 7. Smith, direstor of research; and all members of the School Board were also present. Mrs. Elisabeth Cambell, School Board chairman, explained that the meeting vas called to get advloe and suggestions from the oomoittee concerning some tentative proposals for oonerote notion worked out by the sohool administrative staff and to be presented to the committee by Hr. Batter. Mr. Butter first rsvlevsd the Supreme Court decision and the Gray Commission report. He then told of the Sohool Planning Committee, a group of sohool staff members, both vhlte and Hegro, vhleh he reported hod been meeting monthly to study problems involved In sohool Integration. Mr. Butter said the Sohool Planning Committee had considered several possible plane for Integration drawn up by members of the school administrative staff. She plans vore revised and then presented to the Sohool Board. Hr. Butter outlined these plans to the members of the Integration Committee and ae c d them to vote, shoving vhleh plans they le preferred. These are given at the end of these minutes with the vote on eaoh. In connection with the discussion of the plans, three maps shoving sohool boundary linos and the number and looation of Hegro students expected to bs In our sohools In i960 vers explained and examined Hr. Stanley Smith of the sohool reoearoh staff explained that because of the olose knit Hegro residential communltlee, integration on the elementary sohool level vonld affeot only about 60 Negro children and loss than 5 vhlte. Hr. Taylor brought up the question of orientation of teaohsrs and students. Both Mr. Batter and Mr. Biohardson agreed that vork with the teachers would bs dsslrable. In discussing the timing of integration at the various levels, it vas brought out that because of the serious orovdlng at Wakefield, integration at the junior and senior high levels vonld not be desirable until the aejplatlan a* another junior high. NT, Triable expressed the opinion that integration is impossible this fall in view of the various unresolved questions. He also expressed �doubt whoa the Committee m e naked to vote preference on the recommcndetione end tentatIre tine eohedvd.ee. Be felt that the Gomnittea did not have eoffleient factual information to reach a sound deolelon and that responsibility met ha left to the Sohool Board. Mrs. Campbell eald the reoognissd that the Sohool Board haa the final reeponalhillt/ hat ■he naked for guidance h/ the expression of opinions h/ the group on the rarioue proposals. Enoh member of the group m asked to write thane preferencea. The vote m e at follows: Six neater* of the oonnlttee favored adoption of the following resamendatloni Any Begro parent living oatelde a Xegro school distrlot would ha free to make application for hie children to ha adulttad to a white elementary or Junior high school in vhloh school distrlot he lives. After a conference, the ohlld or children would he transferred. Parents of senior high sohool ilegro pupils would he eligible to apply for admission to e white high sohool. (Boffnan-Boston may he closed to senior hiah sohool students.) Ten members of the committee voted to endorse the following reooauoendation; Maintenance of present polio/ on eehool distrlot lines. Horn ever, no ohlld in grades 1=9 would he required to attend a publlo sohool in whioh another rasa is in a majority. (Hoffaaa-Boston senior high sohool will he closed.) Bus transportation will he provided under both the above reoomaendatlone. The vote m e as follows on the proposed sohool year whan integration sight ho pat into effect in the different grades of the Arlington eohoolel _ I n in IT T 5 2 1 2 6 Grades 1 - 6 1955-56 1955-56 1955-56 1956-57 1956-57 7-9 1955-56 1956-57 1956-57 1956-57 1957-58 9-12 1956-57 1956-57 1957-58 1956-57 1957-58 Totes for / s Idith Burton i/ Secretary, Pro T r en � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource RG 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Minutes of Integration Committee meeting, June 22, 1955 Description An account of the resource Meeting minutes from the June 22 meeting at the School Administration Building. 2 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Committee to Study Problems of Integration in the Arlington Public Schools Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1955-6-22 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_5_12 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/7b633fd6844a4203d2a3c597de12b1bf.pdf 61b922d039f6ba883130df5837cbd50d PDF Text Text ARLINGTON SCHOOL BOARD STATEMENT CONCERNING THE COMMITTEE TO STUDY PROBLEMS OF INTEGRATION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS June 23, 1954-* The Committee on Integration was set up because the Arlington School Board needs help from many different segments of our Arlington population con­ cerning the important matter of putting Into effect the recent United States Supreme Court ruling prohibiting segregation of races in our publio eohoola. Arlington is a Virginia community where separation of white and Negro pupils has been practiced ever since public education was first established in the State. While there are many fine citizens who favor integration, there are many equally fine citizens who have sincere reservations. With this situa­ tion, the best thinking of our community needs to be enlisted so as to study and make recommendations as to the wisest way to bring about the changes which will be required during the next few years because of the Supreme Court ruling. The School Board took into account these principles in setting up the committees 1. The Committee should be large enough to represent many different areas of thinking among our citizens. -2. Persons were not named officially as representatives of groups. (For this reason no presidents of organiza­ tions were asked to serve on the committee.) Rather, the individuals named are connected with representative local organizations and are familiar with the thinking and policies of such groups. They will not be official representatives and therefore will not be required to poll their members in order to suggest or approve a course of action on any matter coming before the committee* '3. Since many diverse aspects of school Integration will probably be studied, the Board named enough people so the Committee can be sub-divided to study these different questions. It is expected that other citizens will be asked by the committee to serve on sub-committees. Also, the School Board requests that at least one school staff member be invited to serve on each sub-committee. There Is great public interest in the work of this body. Because the committee" activities must be so closely tied in with school board policies, the School Board asks that all press releases be approved jointly by the chairman of the Integration Committee and the chairman of the School Board. The Arlington School Board earnestly needs the help of this Inte­ gration Committee. However, it must be made clear that the work of the committee can be only advisory. The committee will make recommendations to the School � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource RG 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Arlington School Board Statement Concerning the Committee to Study Problems of Integration in the Public Schools, June 23, 1954 Description An account of the resource Statement explaining the School Board's decision to set up the committee Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Arlington School Board Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954-6-23 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_5_13 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/57a60a6eabfe018be60f7b9d3e1bb6d3.pdf cb5b8fcefdfd13c2db7eed9b3984c2f4 PDF Text Text FIRST MEETING G? COMMITTEE TO STDDI PROBLEMS Oi IBfBBRATIOS 3$ i ARLIKGTOM PUBLIC SCHOOLS Juno 23, 1954 (Approved V Br. McCaakill and Mrs. Campbell) TWenty»tw® of tha 29 asabars of tho Intonation Caamlttao wsro present at tho first meeting of tha group, hold at Washington-Lee high school, at 8s30 p r . Modnssday, June 23, 1954° .a, Sicas present wore Rot. Jackson A. Browne, Mrs. R, A Burton, Joseph H . . Carr, Dr. Claire Christman, Mrs. A.J.E. Davis, Alfred E. Friable, Col. J. Fuller B o a , S r . Esther Halstead, George Hancock, Edwin T Holland, Mrs. Haskell r c s is . Jacobs, Dr. Harold Johnson, Miss Lillian Lambert, Miss Sally Loving, Dr. J C. McCaakill, lease R Pollard, Georgs Richardson, Dr. Raymond . . Schwarts, Mrs. Mary Shirley, Claude A Swaenoy, Mrs. Killian G. Hatt, . Mias Lena Wolfe. Tho following BCEbsrs of tho camnlttso woro absent? Frank L Ball, Sr., . Victor Blue, Jr., Rov. William H Foster, Mrs. Colin MaePhsrson, Mrs. James D . . Rigdon, Sheedar® W. Taylor, Dr. Curtis E, Tuthill. Mrs. Elizabeth Campbell, Chairman of t a School Board, presided and fs introduced the various casmltteo members, as well as the other members of the Arlington School Boards Mr. Warren Cos, Dr. Barnard Joy, Dr. E R . . Dr&hota, and Dr. L. Clark Keating; Superintendent of Schools T Edward Rutter . and Charloa J. Walsh, Assistant Superintendent in charge of personnel. Each person present was provided with a folder of informational material. Mrs. Campbell then read the policy drawn up by the Arlington School Board te guide the Integration Committee in its w r , ok �- 2- Dr, Jey showed / largo cape of Arlington indicating tho location of > the Qegro schools. Each aap also contained information as to ths hems addrassos of Bs@?o pupils in ths school system, la reply to question* from the eeasiltteo, Sr. J g explained that th® cArlington schools operate on a district teals with tho children required to attend the School to which t o r arc zoned. Io also pointed out that, hj ' in order to hasp th® aehool attendance balanced jAroperly with tho spaco in each building, it ia sometimes nscossary for pupils to bo so l d to attend a ie school which is farther away from their hemes than another aehool building i s th® area. Ha also explained, in response to a question, that th® school s beard has t&a authority to sat up the school districts and that th® diotrletiag ia based on information f o a ths aehool research department. rs Mrs. Campbell suggested teat nominations for ohai;miaa of the Gcsamittss b® by written ballot. The members agreed to m l s thair nominations in at teat manner with tho arrsngsEont teat the two persons who received tho highest number of votes should bo tho naaineas. Dr. Joseph t MeCaakili , and Alfred E. Frioblo war® the two nominated. In tho subsequan'- olection. Dr. MeCaofcUl was named chairman. Before tee election an opportunity was given for the membere to ‘ •.vootion t i nominees and to discuss briefly various phases of tho committee's wort, le l r . Gaapbell suggested that it would bo moat helpful to the School Board ie if the members of tho cazaittse would note what questions are being asked concerning integration in Arlington) also teat it would ba helpful if the members of the committee would bo willing to report what these questions are, and what would be their answers, individually end as a committee. �-3- Mra. Campbell also cold that cambers of the School Board wish to attend matings of tha group. Seas discussion arose as to whathar or not the Integration Committee should ba merely a "sounding board" to got the opinion of the community or whether tho committee should suggest concrete plana for putting integration into effect. It aaa generally agreed that tho cessn t e will eventually ito be asked to suggest plans for integration but the most valuable contributions at tha beginning will bo in tho collection of information and in helping the community to prepare for the e a i g change in tho school system. rsn Mrs. a. A Burton suggested that a steering committee should ba named. . After discussion it was agreed instead that ary committee appointed at this time should be a research committee. Mr. Frlsbio moved that the chairman be empowered to appoint such a committee of not moro than 7 members. Ths motion was carried unanimously. It was suggested that a vice-chairman bo named. Mrs. iUJ.E. Davis nominated Jossa R Pollard, who was elected unanimously, . Ths meeting adjourned subject to the call of the chairman. July 7 - Th® following members of the Integration Committee were , named by Dr. J. C. ticCaokill to serve as members of the sub-committee on research: Mrs. R. A Burton, chairman, Mrs. A.J.E. Davis, Rev. William H . . Poster, Mrs. Esther Halstead, George Hancock, Edwin X Holland, Miss Sally . loving. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource RG 07, Arlington County Public Schools Description An account of the resource Record Group 07 contains the incomplete and unofficial records of the Arlington County, Virginia, public school system. The entire collection measures 20.85 linear feet, and ranges in date between 1909 and 2004. The bulk of the material is from the period 1946-1988. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource First Meeting of Committee to Study Problems on Integration in Arlington Public Schools June 23, 1954 Description An account of the resource Meeting minutes from the committee's first meeting on June 23, 1954 at Washington-Lee high school. 3 pages Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Committee to Study Problems of Integration in the Arlington Public Schools Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1950s Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource This image is subject to copyright. Unauthorized use of the images in the Local History Collections of the Arlington Community Archives is prohibited. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1954-6-23 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 07, Arlington Public Schools Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 7_1_8_5_14 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/ff4bcd41e4647cb5e279943138b01ac2.pdf 5b8d99f92dd63d83e5dfd636041d1705 PDF Text Text VIRGINIA HEALTH Vol. XVI. BULLETIN MARCH. 1924. Extra No. 2. The New Virginia Law To Preserve Racial Integrity W. A. P lecker, M. I)., Stale Registrar of Vital Statistics, Richmond, Va. Senate Bill 219, To preserve racial integrity, passed the House March 8, 1924, and is now a law of the State. This bill aims at correcting a condition which only the more thought­ ful people of Virginia know the existence of. It is estimated that there arc in the State from 10,000 to 20,000, possibly more, near white people, who are known to j>ossess an inter­ mixture of colored blood, in some cases to a slight extent it is true, but still enough to prevent them from being white. In the past it has been i>ossible for these jicoplc to declare them­ selves as white, or even to have the Court so declare them. Then they have demanded the admittance of their children into the white schools, and in not a few cases have intermarried with white people. In many counties they exist as distinct colonies holding themselves aloof from negroes, but not being admitted by the white people as of their race. In any large gathering or school of colored |>cople, esjjccially in the cities, many will be observed who are scarcely distinguishable as colored. These persons, however, are not white in reality, nor by the new definition of this law, that a white person is one with no trace of the blood of another race, except that a person with one-sixteenth of the American Indian, if there is no other nice mixture, may be classed as white. Their children are likely to revert to the distinctly negro type even when all apparent evidence of mixture has disappeared. The Virginia Bureau of Vital Statistics has l>een called upon within one month for evidence by two lawyers employed to assist people of this type to force their children into the white public schools, and by another employed by the school trustees of a district to prevent this action. Entered as second class m atter July 28, 1908, a t the Postoffice a t Richmond, Va., under the Act of July 16, 1894. �2 Virginia Health Bulletin In each case evidence was found to show that cither the people them­ selvesor their connections were reported to our officeto beof mixed blood. Our bureau has kept a watchful eye upon the situation, and has guarded the welfare of the State as far as possible with inadequate law and power. The condition has gone on, however, and is rapidly in­ creasing in importance. Unless radical measures are used to prevent it. Virginia and other parts of the Nation must surely in time go the way of all other countries in which people of two or more races have lived in close contact. With the exception of the Hebrew race, complete intermixture or amalgama­ tion has l> the inevitable result. een To succeed, the intermarriage of the white race with mixed stock must be made impossible. But that is not sufficient, public sentiment must be 9o aroused that intermixture « u of wedlock will cease. >t The public must be led to lookwith scornand contempt upon the man who will degrade himself and do harm to society by such abhorrent deeds. TIjc Bureau of Vital Statistics, Clerks who issue marriage licenses, and Ilie school autlairities are the barrier* placed by this law between the danger and tin* safety of the Commonwealth The task of the Bureau of Vital Statistics is a great one, with not a cent of appropriation to accomplish it with. There is a plan, however, by which it may be financed if the public will lend its aid. Thousands have applied for the registration of births tliat occurred before June 14, 1912, the date when the old law went into effect. The new law further prorides for the registration of all persons who desire it, and who will make application for such registration of color and birth, remitting at the same time the fee of twenty-five cents for each applicant. I)o not send stamps. These births will be perma­ nently recorded and preserved for all time, and will lie of great value for many purposes, such as to prove American citizenship when apply­ ing for jassports to go abroad, and for establishing and preserving the family tree for future generations. We will even admit for registration persons living in Virginia but born elsewhere. Ako Virginians now living elsewhere. A family may complete its family tree by recording deceased ancestors or relatives. Kach person w thus obtain full value received for the small fee. Mar­ ill ried womensltouldgiveboth their full maiden nameand name of husband. If ten or twenty thousand or more w register within the next few ill weeks, we will he able to provide printed forms, filing cases, desks, type­ writers, postage, and clerk hire, to begin a vigorous State-wide educa­ tional propaganda. After 90 days those who do not register at once may do it through our local registrars at the same cost. Write at once for sufficient registration cards and instructions, enclosing for reply a stamped addressed envelope large enough to ho!d3by 5inch cards. Acard announcing the registration w be returned as soon as possible. Ixtdges, ill patriotic orders, womens’ organizations, and schools can act in Indies. For the purpose of establishing the true color of individuals for the future, physicians and others who report births and marriages, will as far as possible use color terms accurately. A Mulatto is the offspring of a white person ami a negro. A Quadroon is the offspring of a mulatto and a white person. An Octoroon is the offspring of a quadroon and a white person. �_______ T h e A'ctt V irg in ia L a w T o Preserve R a cial*Integrity 3 Mixtures of either of these crossings with true negroes should be designated as Black, Negro or Colored. The term “Mixed,” “Issue," and perliaps one or two others, will be understood to mean a mixture of white and black races, with the white predominating. That is the class that should be reported with the greatest care as many of these are on the borderline, and constitute the real danger of race intermixture. The term “Indian” will no longer be accepted for that class, but must be applied only to those of known pure Indian blood, or those mixed with white. If there is a mixture of nepv they must not be classed as Indians but as “Negro” or “M Indian.” ixed Japanese, Chinese and other Mongolian and Malay races must be designated as such, giving U country of their birth or of their ances­ ie tors. When crossed with white, the race mixture should be indicated as Japanese-white. If with black they should be designated as black or negro, but it may be written twgro-Japancse. The Virginia Bureau of Vital Statistics is in jiosscasion of the mar­ riage records for the State l>ack to 1853, arranged by counties or cities and years, but they are not indexed further Iwck tlian 1917. Also births and deatlis, covering the period 1853 to 1896. If these can be properly indexed they will afiford an invaluable source of reference for establishing color in many cases, and for other purposes. If sufficient revenue is derived from the registration fees, it ts hoped that this indexing can he done. Address BUREAU OF VITAL STATISTICS, D ep t. 1924 L ate. RICHMOND, V . A AN ACT TO PRESERVE RACIAL INTEGRITY. 1. Be it enacted hv the General Assembly of Virginia, That the State registrar of vital statistics may as soon as practicable after the taking effect of this act, prepare a form whereon the racial composition of any individual, as Caucasian, Negro, Mongolian, American Indian, Asicatir Indian, Malay, or any mixture thereof, or any other nonCaurasicstrains, and if there be any mixture, then the racial composition of the parents and other ancestors, in so far as ascertainable, so as to show in what generation such mixture occurred, may be certified by such individual, which form shall lie known ns a registration certificate. The State registrar may supply to each local registrar a sufficient num­ ber of such forms for the puqxiaesi of tliis act; each local registrar may rsonall.v or by deputy, as soon as jxwsiblc after receiving said forms, vc made thereon in duplicate a certificate of the racial composition as aforesaid, of each person resident in his district, who so desires, bom before June fourteen, nineteen hundred and twelve, which certificate shall lie made over the signature of said person, or in the case of children K �4 Virginia Health Bulletin under fourteen years of age. over the signature of a parent, guardian, or other person standing in loco parentis. One of said certificates for each person thus registering in ever}- district shall be forwarded to the State registrar for his files; the other shall be kept on file by the local registrar. Every local registrar may, as soon as practicable, have such regis­ tration certification made by or for each person in his district who so desires, lx>rn before June fourteen, nineteen hundred and twelve, for whom he has not on file a registration certificate, or a birth certificate. 2. It shall be a felony for any person wilfully or knowingly to make a registration certificate false as to color or race. The wilful making of a false registration or birth certificate shall be punished by confinement in the penitentiary for one year. 3. For each registration certificate properly made and returned to the State registrar, the local registrar returning the same shall be entitled to a fee of twenty-five cents, to lie paid by the registrant. Application for registration and for transcript may lx? made direct to the State Registrar, who may retain the fee for expenses of his office. 4. No marriage license shall lx? granted until the clerk or deputy clerk has reasonable assurance that the statements as to color of both man and woman are correct. If there is reasonable cause to disbelieve that applicants arc of pure white race, when that fact is stated, the clerk or deputy clerk shall withhold the granting of the license until satisfactory proof is produced that both applicants are “white persons” as provided for in this act The clerk or deputy clerk shall use the same care to assure himself that both applicants are colored, when that fact is claimed. 5. It shall hereafter lx? unlawful for any white person in this State to marry any save a white person, or a person with no other admixture of blood than white and American Indian. For the purpose of this act, the term “white person” shall apply only to the person who has no trace whatsoever of any blood other than Caucasian; but persons who have one-sixteenth or less of the blood of the American Indian and have no other non-Caucasic blood shall be deemed to be white persons. All laws heretofore passed and now in effect regarding the intermarriage of white and colored persons shall apply to marriages prohibited by this act. 6. For carrying out the purposes of this act and to provide the necessary clerical assistance, ix)stage and.other expenses of the State registrar of vital statistics, twenty per cent of the fees received by local registrars under this act shall be paid to the State Bureau of Vital Statistics, which may be expended by the said bureau for the purposes of this act. 7. All acts or parts of acts inconsistent with this act are, to the extent of such inconsistency, hereby repealed. � https://projectdaps.org/files/original/4b0e63b50f01bd492d5af939ccd93249.jpeg 20cac6434ea0961af2e3c4199a2b6d15 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource "The New Virginia Law to Preserve Racial Integrity," from Virginia Health Bulletin, vol. XVI, March 1924, Extra No. 2 Description An account of the resource This Extra edition of the Virginia Health Bulletin discusses and reprints Virginia's Racial Integrity Act of 1924. In the Virginia Law to Preserve Racial Integrity, "white" persons were defined as those with "no trace whatsoever of any blood other than Caucasian" or "one-sixteenth or less of the blood of the American Indian." The second part of the definition was included to appease a group of prominent Virginians who claimed to be descendants of Pocahontas and John Rolfe. 4 pages. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Virginia Department of Health Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://lva.omeka.net/exhibits/show/law_and_justice/item/62" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">The Library of Virginia</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Virginia Department of Health, Library of Virginia Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1924-3 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Included with the permission of the <a href="http://www.lva.virginia.gov/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Library of Virginia</a> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource PDF Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context VAPRI1 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1920s https://projectdaps.org/files/original/fb06fd9eae9df5b11caaf14a8e023855.pdf 4d082f6edc46b5d367d271f932990536 PDF Text Text EXTRACTS FROM BOARD ACTION ON 28 JUNE 1971 CONCERNING t - CURRENT LITIGATION SEEKING INTEGRATION of DREW AND HOFFMAN-BOSTON ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Board Statement of Policy Guidelines to be Used in Desegregating the Schools Table Showing the Consequences of Applying the Guidelines �ARLINGTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS June 28, 1971 STATEMENT OF POLICY ISSUED BY THE ARLINGTON COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD CONCERNING CURRENT LITIGATION SEEKING INTEGRATION OF DREW AND HOFFMAN-BOSTON ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS The School Board has held many lengthy conferences with its attorneys on the suit instituted by parents in the Drew School area asking the federal courts to require further integration in the Arlington School System. A consultant attorney experienced in this field participated in these conferences. The School Board was eventually advised that the recent Supreme Court decisions and subsequent decisions by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, which includes Virginia, make it clear that the ultimate result of that case would be a federal court order requiring the Arlington County School Board to take further steps to integrate its school system into a unitary system. The School Board has worked with the staff and the attorneys to develop a plan for integration of the two schools which would best meet not only the anticipated legal requirements but also the best interests of all Arlington students and of the community as a whole. During this process the School Board instructed its attorneys to consult with the attorneys for the plaintiffs in order to try to reach an agreement on a desegregation plan that would reduce rather than increase tensions. Several meetings and conversations took place, but no agreement was reached. The School Board discussed many times the possibility of inviting the public to take part in the development of a plan. For some weeks, consultation between our respective attorneys looked like a better procedure; by the time it became clear that further consultation would be unproductive, there was too little time for meaningful public participation. For this reason and because of the legal and technical complexities, the Board decided that the obligation and responsi­ bility could not be so shared, nor would the community benefit by public discussion of an issue of this nature, especially under these circumstances. The Board will release tonight the plan it has developed. Briefly stated: The students in grades 1-6 of Drew and Hoffman-Bos ton will be assigned to elementary schools throughout the Arlington School System. Kindergartens will continue at both Drew and Hoffman-Boston. No present school boundaries will be changed. A school will not be assigned students in such numbers that its total enrollment will exceed its rated capacity by more than 5%. Every elemen­ tary school will be integrated. In future years, students advancing from an elementary school will attend the junior high school or schools serving that elementary school and then to the senior high school or schools serving that junior high school. During the coming year the School Board will develop plans for a model school to be located in the Drew building and operated on an integrated basis. We hope that imaginative new approaches to elementary education and smaller �Statement of Policy Page 2 classes will attract many parents who wish their children to have this type of education which we cannot now maintain in all schools. Time does not permit the planning, nor are the funds available, to implement the model school concept by the beginning of the new school year in September, 1971. However, the School Board is very willing to explore this possibility on a reduced scale. It is planned that the Drew School facility will be used for the Montessori pre-kindergarten, the Drew kindergarten, adult education, and for other school programs; the HoffmanBoston building will be used for the Hoffman-Boston pre-kindergarten, kindergarten, and for the 7th grade of Thomas Jefferson Junior High School. The details of our plans are being made available to the news media. Summary sheets will be placed on the table outside the door for interested individuals. The full details will soon be available at the information desk in the lobby of this building. They will also be mailed in response to a phone call to the Information Office— 558-2838. Speaking for the Board as Chairman, I now move (1) that we instruct our attorneys to file with the U.S. District Court the plans described in the staff memorandum and documents of today’s date, and (2) that we instruct the staff to proceed to carry out the plan. �SECTION II Guidelines to be Used in Desegregating Drew and Hoffman-Boston Elementary Schools 1. Drew and Hoffman-Boston kindergarten students will remain at Drew and the Thomas Jefferson Annex (where Hoffman-Boston students are presently housed). 2. Drew and Hoffman-Boston students for grades 1 through 6 will be assigned to other elementary schools: a. When the added students, would not cause the receiving school to have an enrollment exceeding its established rated capacity by more than 5%. b. At a ratio of black to white of as close to 11% as is practical within a range of 7% to 15%, with the exception of the following elementary schools whose present attendance areas enroll more than 15% black students: (1) (2) Fort Myer, whose ratio is approximately 18% (3) George Mason Center, whose ratio is approximately 19% (4) 3. Glebe, whose ratio is approximately 22% Patrick Henry, whose ratio is approximately 18% Family groupings will be taken into account in assignment to a particular school. 4. Transportation will be provided as needed. �ARLINGTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS Department of Research June 25, 1971 ELEMENTARY PUPIL MEMBERSHIP— Est. 1971-72 GRADES I thru 6 Only With DREW A HOFFMAN-BOSTON - Grs. 1-6 Housed Outside Their Present Elementary Districts SCHOOLS Ab1 ngdon Ash lawn Barcroft Barrett C1 aremont C1 ay-Ff1Imore Oust i s Drew Fair linqton . Ft. Myer Geo. Mason Glebe Glencarlyn Henry Hoff-Boston Jackson Jamestown Key Madison Maury McKinley Nottingham Nat'1 Orth. Oakridqe Page Randolph Reed Taylor Tuckahoe Woodmont TOTAL: Memb. NEGRO PUPILS Est. Per1---Est. New No. Add From Tota 1 Rated PerCent Tota 1 Negro Drew and Neqro Tota 1 Capacity Cent Over 1971-72 Now H-B 71-72 1971-72 Neqro Capacity 470 1 1 52 63 522 675 1.1 2 % 1 4 358 30 44 388 385 11.3 n 314 3 39 42 353 350 11. 9 i 410 3 -03 0.7 410 375 9 408 5 49 54 457 450 11. 8 2 27 300 6 33 327 325 1.1 0 1 34 253 -034 287 300 11.8 590 -0309 8 341 32 40 350 11. 7 277 50 277 18.1 -050 425 69 1 2 -01 2 69 17.4 70 421 89 89 421 -0500 21.1 439 35 7 42 9.4 5 446 425 553 100 -0100 553 632 18.1 11 4 -0408 2 1 2 1 4 420 400 3.3 5 489 -066 66 555 575 11. 9 666 24 5 1 3 11 677 645 3.5 263 -036 299 12.0 36 325 156 1 7 3 20 173 175 11. 6 1 3 323 43 353 30 425 12.2 496 2 28 30 524 500 5.7 5 5 -05 519 37 29 66 556 705 11.9 326 2 42 44 368 425 12.0 435 8 54 481 46 475 1 11.2 ~ STS 77 77 550 15.1 -0510 586 59 1 0 69 596 650 11. 6 465 2 58 60 523 500 5 11. 5 -0301 4 1 4 1 342 450 12.0 11,233 546 704 1,250 11,233 — II lt .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 70, The Personal Papers of Barnard D. Joy 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 Extracts from Board Action on 28 June 1971 Concerning Current Litigation Seeking Integration of Drew and Hoffman-Boston Elementary Schools. June 28, 1971. Description An account of the resource Statement of Arlington School Board Policy, guidelines to be used in desegregating schools and table showing the consequences of applying guidelines. 5 pages. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1971-6-28 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 70, The Personal Papers of Barnard D. Joy Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Arlington School Board Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1970s 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 70_1_2_3 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/ee22f193d3b60167d3949274aa380069.pdf 3ca90ac3dc88738044f287b42c8f3c37 PDF Text Text p _ W eflN U CCiiffilTEE FOB Plffliffi i - ■ BROAD BRACE ARCADE V ij. .,i; — ORGANIZING TO SAVE PUBLIC SCHOOLS... 19St, - H ow V ir g in ia n s r a llie d to th e d e t e n s e o t th e p u b lic s c h o o l s y s t e m in th e V irg in ia C o m m itte e to r P u b lic S c h o o ls / ?S? �F o rew o rd This story of the Virginia Committee for Public Schools, tells how citizens concerned over the safety of public schools in Virginia organized in a body 25,000 strong, and how this organization has played a significant part in meeting threats to the public school system of this state. The author is William Marion Lightsey, Executive Sec­ retary of the Virginia Committee for Public Schools, who was assisted by Dr. J. L. Blair Buck, President of that organization. M r. Lightsey is a native of South Carolina, now residing in Arlington, Virginia, who was until recently an official of the United States Department of Agriculture. H e has been a leader for many years in Parent-Teacher Association activities. H e was a charter member of the Arlington Committee for Public Schools and its President during the crucial fall of 1958. H e was active in the Virginia Committee from its inception. Dr. Buck was an official of the Virginia Department of Education from 1929 until his retirement in 1956. H e is the author of the historical work, “The Development of Public Schools in Virginia.” \ The Messenger Press Manassas, Va. �THE VIRGINIA COMMITTEE FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS The Virginia Committees for Public Schools were not in­ tended to replace the Parent-Teacher Associations, the Virginia Education Associations, or other of those groups which have labored long and effectively on behalf of public education in Virginia. The Committees for Public Schools stepped in to fill a void left by the initial failure of other organizations, for a variety of reasons, to embark on the strong state-wide pro­ gram necessary to convince Virginia law-makers that Virgini­ ans did not want to sacrifice their public schools. Many members and leaders of the Committees for Public Schools are also members of the P-TA, the VEA, or other groups concerned with public schools and with the general welfare. The singleness of purpose of the Committees for Public Schools permits these members of other groups to par­ ticipate in the coordinated, fast-moving action program neces­ sary to meet an emergency. The purpose of the Virginia Committee for Public Schools is simply stated on its membership card: We affirm our determined support of free public education for every child in Virginia. We believe this should continue to be guaranteed by the Constitution of Virginia. ONE YEAR’S PROGRESS The movement began separately in several different com­ munities. It began first in Arlington in April, 1958, with a meeting of community leaders who were afraid their public schools would be closed in September under the state’s “ mas­ sive resistance” laws. It began in Charlottesville, Norfolk and Front Royal (W arren County), when the opening of public schools in those localities was prevented in September 1958. It began in Richmond, and other areas not immediately threatened with school closings, when it became evident in late 1958 that the courts would invalidate the “massive resistance” laws. The prospect that the General Assembly would be called into special session raised the danger of legislation threatening public schools. 1 �At the end of the first year, in July 1959 more than 25,000 white Virginia residents held membership in the Vir­ ginia Committee for Public Schools. Local Committees for Public Schools were organized and operating in fifteen cities and counties: Alexandria, Arlington, Blacksburg, Charlottes­ ville, Christiansburg, Fairfax-Falls Church, Lynchburg, Nor­ folk, Newport News and Peninsula Area, Radford, Richmond Rockingham County, Warren County, Washington County, and Waynesboro. Meanwhile, the Virginia Committee for Public Schools had had a profound and salutary effect upon legislation and state policy in Virginia. Arlington In the spring of 1958 a group of citizens met to assess the possible application of the Virginia “massive resistance” laws in Arlington County and to consider whether there was a need for a citizens’ organization other than groups like the Parent-Teacher Associations and the local Citizens Committee for School Improvement which already concerned themselves with school problems. It was decided that a new organization was needed to draw all segments and philosophies of the community together in support of a single objective: the prevention of the closing of the public schools in Arlington. O f basic importance was an initial decision that the policy of the organization would be to support neither segregation nor integration of the schools — and that this policy must be con­ tinually emphasized. From its inception the group included segregationists and citizens of many shades of opinion on this question. A fter several meetings and much discussion and planning, on May 1, 23 Arlington citizens issued the following statement: The undersigned Arlington citizens and parents, alarmed about the future of our public schools, have been considering ways and means to assure maintenance of public education in Arl­ ington next fall. This is necessitated by the prospective applica­ tion of Virginia State laws closing schools under Federal court action outlawing segregation. For this reason we have formed an interim Organizing Committee to Preserve Public Schools, and we invite all like-minded persons who share our concern to join us. We shall see that the public is kept fully informed on developments in this matter. 2 �The Organizing Committee has concluded so far: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. We are determined to pursue every legal means to keep public schools open. We are here concerned neither with perpetuating segregation in schools noi* hastening integration. We oppose entrusting public education to private hands having no responsibility or accountability to the general public. We have faith in Arlington’s ability to meet its public edu­ cation problems. We recognize the excellence of the teaching and adminis­ trative staff in Arlington schools. We assure them that the community values its educational system and that it is determined to maintain its public schools. We urge Arl­ ington teachers to stand with the community in the days ahead. Response to this announcement clearly indicated that citizens wanted an organization which would work solely for the preservation of public schools and which could unite thousands of Arlingtonians in this one crucial purpose. An en­ larged organizing group held a meeting on June 12, which was attended by nearly 700 people. This meeting established the Arlington Committee to Preserve Public Schools. It adopted by-laws and elected officers and an executive board. The by-laws included the five conclusions listed above. During the summer months the executive board kept abreast of the legal and administrative aspects of this problem; conferred with local officials including the Arlington School Board and kept its membership informed. The latter now numbered over 3,300. Members of the executive board joined with other community leaders in conferring with Governor Almond and assuring him of the desire of the overwhelming majority of Arlington citizens to keep the public schools open. The legal sub-committee studied various steps which indi­ vidual citizens or local officials might take in State or Federal courts to insure continued public education. It came to the con­ clusion that the State school-closing and fund-withholding laws would be declared unconstitutional by the courts. Late in August, after due deliberation, the executive board announced its decision that any suit designed to test the consti­ tutionality of the Virginia school-closing law would be inad­ visable unless, or until, a school was actually closed. Members of the legal sub-committee, however, were prepared to be of assistance to plaintiffs whenever the filing of suits should be­ come appropriate. 3 �The immediate threat of school closings was temporarily relieved when the Federal Court early in September post­ poned until February, 1959, the effective date of admission of four Negro applicants to one of the junior high schools in the county. During the fall of 1958 the interest and activity of the Arlington committee was directed primarily to working with similar groups in other Virginia communities faced with the closing of public schools and to increasing the membership of the Arlington committee, which had reached 4,500 by No­ vember. Charlottesville The opening of the Charlottesville public schools sched­ uled for September, 1958, was postponed by the school board pending the decision of the Federal court on the applications of twelve Negroes to two white schools. Under the “massive resistance” laws of Virginia, the schools were later to be closed by the Governor when the court ordered the admission of Negro applicants. One Charlottesville parent, unable to accept closed public schools as the answer to the desegregation problem, decided to see what he could do about it. A public school teacher gave him the names of several people who might be interested in dis­ cussing the problem. H e found three other parents who felt that something should be done and were tired of waiting for others to do it. Seven parents came together for the first meeting to de­ termine how the community could be aroused to voice opposi­ tion to closed public schools. These seven organizers did not represent any particular civic group nor were they identified with integrationist or liberal organizations. They were just concerned parents. After a telephone call to a leader of the Arlington com­ mittee, the organizers decided to form a similar committee. Be­ cause of the imminence of the court decision, it was decided to call an organizational meeting four days later. They obtained copies of the Arlington committee by-laws, objectives, member­ ship literature, and history, using these as patterns for their plans for organization. 4 �The organizers telephoned friends and neighbors and all who they thought might be interested, inviting them to attend an organizational meeting. They called upon prominent local businessmen and civic leaders, trying to interest them in as­ suming the leadership of the group. There were few volunteers in this quarter, but they found many citizens like themselves who were concerned and had been waiting for someone to start a public movement. Each person who attended the organizational meeting was handed a statement of objectives. Over 200 attended the meeting and 167 of these signed membership cards. The ob­ jectives were discussed, a motion to organize and to approve the objectives was passed, and a resolution was adopted calling on the school board to request the Governor to return the Charlottesville schools to local control. An executive board of seven was elected. This was empowered to complete the or­ ganization of the committee and to act for its membership. During the following weeks, the committee directed its efforts to increasing its membership and awakening the com­ munity to the need for maintaining public education. By the first of November membership in the committee had reached 1, 000. The principal lesson to be learned from the experience of the Charlottesville committee was that organization should take place before the crisis. By waiting until the need for action was acute, the committee found itself overburdened with or­ ganizational problems at a time when the total effect should have been directed to action. Also, by not organizing until school closing was imminent, feeling in the community had been allowed to harden and leaders in vulnerable business and professional positions were reluctant to expose themselves and risk economic reprisals. Nevertheless, a feeling of loyalty to public schools was kept alive during the five-months resort to private schools. Many school patrons insisted that they were patronizing private schools from necessity and only until the public schools should be opened again. 5 �Norfolk A small group of parents met several times during the summer of 1958 to discuss what could be done to keep Norfolk schools open and to prevent violence there if schools should open in September on a desegregated basis. When September came and six schools were closed, shutting out nearly 10,000 pupils, this group called on the Arlington committee for advice and material, and went to work. The Norfolk Committee for Public Schools was formally organized September 16, 1958. A prepared statement of pur­ pose was adopted and officers and executive committee were elected. It was decided to announce the formation of the com­ mittee and solicit public support by means of newspaper ad­ vertising and general publicity as soon as the support of com­ munity leaders could be obtained. Prominent businessmen and civic leaders were personally contacted and asked if they would join with 100 or more like themselves in a public announcement of support for the pur­ poses of the committee and for the reopening of the Norfolk schools. On September 24 and 25 the committee placed a nearlyfull-page ad in the two Norfolk newspapers. The ad stated the purpose of the committee, gave the names of the officers and executive board, listed the names of 150 prominent citizens whose support had been obtained, and invited others of like mind to become members. A downtown office was opened and manned with volunteer workers. On September 30, a further ad in both newspapers asked citizens to clip and return a coupon requesting the city council to join a willing school board in petitioning the Gov­ ernor to return the closed Norfolk schools to local control. The gratifying results of this newspaper poll were used by spokes­ men for the committee in appearances before the city council urging its support in the effort to obtain the return of the schools for operation by the city. On October 9 a rally of women volunteers was held for the purpose of organizing a house-to-house canvass for in­ creased membership in the committee. By this and other means the membership had reached 6,500 by early November. In response to a request from a number of white parents, 6 �the committee agreed to furnish legal assistance in advancing a suit in Federal court designed to force the reopening of the closed schools. This was the famous “James vs. Almond” case, which resulted in the downfall of Virginia’s “massive resist­ ance” laws, the reopening of the Norfolk schools, and the pre­ vention of school-closings in other Virginia communities. The Norfolk Committee for Public Schools assumed the responsibility for raising the $8,000 to $10,000 necessary to finance the suit in the various courts. Warren County The people of this county seemed stunned in September, 1958, when unexpected and swift court action resulted in an order for the immediate admission of 21 Negro applicants to the Warren County High School at Front Royal, and the Governor, under the “massive resistance” laws ordered the school closed immediately. The sense of shock was evidenced by the complete silence and apparent apathy of the leadership of the community. However, there was not a complete lack of action. On the night the school was closed three parents took council to see if anything could be done to gain community support for re-opening the school. One mentioned the Committees for Public Schools that had been formed now in Arlington, Char­ lottesville and Norfolk. Arlington leaders were called on for advice and material. Two nights later a group of twelve citizens met and de­ cided to form a committee. Proposed by-laws and organiza­ tional plans were developed. Four days later four members of this group went to Richmond and met there with leaders of the three committees already operating in Arlington, Charlottes­ ville and Norfolk. A week later an organizational meeting Was held in Front Royal. All persons interested in re-opening the school, even if it must be integrated, were invited to attend. Eighty-seven citizens met and organized a Committee for Public Schools. In the meantime, however, most community leaders re­ mained silent, while extreme segregationists began public ap­ peals to the emotions of the people. In a short time antiNegro, pro-segregation sentiment had spread throughout the county. 7 �Warren County stands out as an example of what can hap­ pen in almost any community in the South if the moderate community leadership fails to consider, in advance of the crisisy the damaging results of closed schools. The Warren County Committee for Public Schools has continued to work more or less quietly and has a membership of above 200. Committees Get Together As the pioneer committees were organizing in the four communities immediately threatened with school-dosing, con­ ferences were held by telephone or by visits among the leaders. As a result, the pattern of organization of the groups de­ veloped along similar lines. In October 1958, at the request of W arren County leaders, representatives of the four groups met for the first time in Richmond. This meeting took the form of a round-table discussion of the problems facing the committees and ways and means of increasing their effectiveness. Those attending this meeting agreed that another should be held early in November and that consideration should be given to forming a state organization. The next meeting was held in Richmond on November 8, 1958. In addition to seventeen representatives from the existing committees, individuals from Alexandria, Fairfax county, Lynchburg and Richmond were now present. At this meeting and at subsequent meetings, by far the most interesting and exciting part of the agenda were the reports of the local committees, particularly those of the pioneer groups. The meeting heard a complete report and forecast on the current legal situation in Virginia, given by Mr. Warren Cox, chairman of the legal sub-committee of the Arlington Committee. The two pending suits testing the validity of the “massive resistance” laws were explained by M r. Cox. One suit, “Almond vs. Day” , was brought by the state it­ self directly before the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia. This sought an opinion on the validity of the school-closing law, certain provisions for tuition grants for private school education, and the provision in the 1958 appropriation act for withdrawing state funds from integrated schools. It also sought to test the soundness of the contention of state authori­ ties that the Federal Court prohibition against segregated 8 �schools had made inoperative Section 129 of the State Consti­ tution, which requires the State to maintain public schools, on the theory that Section 129 had reference only to segregated schools. M r. Cox also discussed the “James vs. Almond” case, in which 26 Norfolk residents, including 11 children, were chal­ lenging the school-closing law in the Federal Court on the ground that closing the Norfolk schools, while permitting schools in the rest of the state to operate, was depriving the plaintiffs, and all others in Norfolk, of equal protection of the laws and was in violation ot the 14th amendment of the United States Constitution. M r. Cox predicted that the results of these suits would be to establish clearly that Virginia had a choice only between:(l) allowing some integration in the public schools or (2) closing all schools in the state; and further that the latter choice could be effected only by amending the State Constitution. The group unanimously agreed that another meeting should be called in a few weeks and that this meeting should take steps to form a state organization or federation of local committees. Dr. J. L. Blair Buck of Richmond consented to serve as a Temporary Coordinator and to set up a message center for the exchange of information. It was agreed that the committee members and others would contact local leaders in their communities to determine those who would be willing to join with others throughout the state in launching an all-out appeal for support of public edu­ cation. Local representatives were asked to send to Dr. Buck suggestions and plans for statewide publicity and for the dis­ tribution of educational leaflets and other material of an edu* cational nature on the advantages and need of public schools The State Committee Is Formed The next meeting was called by Dr. Buck as Temporary Coordinator and was held in Richmond on December 6. Seventy-five attended, forty from Richmond and the remain­ ing 35 from 14 different cities and counties. In addition to lay­ ing plans for a central state organization, the meeting served as a means of acquainting Richmond leaders with the work of the local committees in other areas and providing a stimulus for the organization of a local committee in the Richmond area. 9 �Many excellent statements concerning the need for alerting the state to the danger of losing its public schools were made by prominent businessmen and civic leaders. The Temporary Coordinator reported that a downtown office in Richmond had been obtained and would be staffed to serve as a “message center” and as headquarters for any work needed to be done in developing a coordinated state effort. Official action taken by the group included: (1) Declaration of intention to form a state organiza­ tion, the name to be decided by a committee to be appointed by the presiding chairman; (2) Authorization for the chairman to appoint a com­ mittee of seven, representing the geographical areas concerned, to formulate principles and plans for organization j (3) Authorization for Dr. Buck to continue as Tem­ porary Coordinator and chairman of the organizing group; and (4) Approval of the following statement of purpose: “ We affirm our determined support of free public education for every child in Virginia. W e believe that this should con­ tinue to be guaranteed by the Constitution of Virginia.” The organizing group, which the Temporary Coordinator appointed to serve as a pro-tem steering committee, consisted of representatives from Arlington, Charlottesville, Norfolk, Richmond, and Waynesboro. A seventh member, from New­ port News, was added later. The formal organization and the election of permanent officers and executive board members was not complete until the fifth meeting of the steering committee which was held on February 14. However, the central Richmond office began operating, almost immediately following the December 6 meeting, under the direction of the Temporary Coordinator. FIRST STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING At this meeting in Richmond on January 7, 1959, the following action was taken: (1) The name “ Virginia Committees for Public Schools” was adopted. (2) It was agreed that the officers would be: President, two or more Vice Presidents, Secretary, and Treasurer. (3) Approval of a motion to provide for a Board of Di­ rectors of not less than 21, with an Executive Committee of nine (geographically selected), and that authority be given for this 10 �Executive Committee to increase its membership. A later mo­ tion named the Steering Committee members, plus the Temporary Coordinator, as the Executive Committee. (4) Provision for appointment of standing committees for Finance, Legislation Membership, and Publicity, and for an Executive Secretary. (5) Adoption of the following Statement of Principles: We believe that a state-wide system of public education is es­ sential to the welfare of Virginia. Our belief rests on the following premises: That representative government depends for its success on an educated electorate; that the economic prosperity of Virginia depends upon a high level of educational preparation of the youth of the Commonwealth. I f the public school system of Virginia is abandoned or allowed to deteriorate, we believe: That the cost to parents of private education would pre­ vent the education of large numbers of children; That the absence of public education through any prolonged period of time would lead inevitably to widespread discouragement and even demoralization among the children and youth of the state with rising welfare and delinquency problems resulting; That drastic dislocations in the economic balance of the state would be caused by movements of population from communi­ ties without public schools; That new industry would not be attracted to Virginia and existing industries would in some cases withdraw their plants from the state with a resultant loss of employment opportunity for all people of the Commonwealth; and That property values would drop, with resulting loss to householders. We therefore affirm our determined support of free public education for every child in Virginia. We believe this should con­ tinue to be guaranteed by the Constitution of Virginia. (6) It was agreed that the membership cards for the Vir­ ginia Committee would carry the above affirmation. ORGANIZATION LIMITED TO WHITE CITIZENS Dr. Buck, who was elected Acting Executive Secretary at this meeting, explained the reasons why it seemed necessary to adopt a policy of limiting membership in the committee to white residents of Virginia: (1) It was hoped that this policy would help counteract the oft-repeated statement that the white voters of Virginia would prefer to abandon public schools entirely rather than ac­ cept any integration. (2) The hope of securing a large number of white 11 �members could not be realized through a bi-racial committee in the present climate of public opinion. Dr. Buck explained that this subject had been discussed with several Negro leaders and they had a thorough under­ standing of the reason for restricting the membership of the committee. A chairman of a special By-laws Committee was appointed and asked to draw up a set of proposed by-laws for presenta­ tion at the next meeting SECOND STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING The second Steering Committee meeting was held in Rich­ mond on January 24, 1959. This meeting came four days after the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals and the Federal Dis­ trict Court handed down decisions which shattered the “mas­ sive resistance” laws of Virginia. The by-laws proposed by the special committee appointed at the previous meeting were studied, discussed and adopted. The by-laws were made as simple as possible. They provided for officers and Executive Board as agreed upon at the January 7 meeting. Broad power to act for the membership of the committee was given to the Executive Board. The Executive Secretary was made responsible for carrying out the operations of the committee. The work of the committee would be financed through contributions received from local committees, members and friends. The by-laws provided for two types of membership in the state committee. (1) Individual membership for those in areas where a local committee did not exist, and (2) The automatic membership resulting from being a member of a local committee which is affiliated with the state committee. The question of incorporation of the Virginia Committees for Public Schools was discussed. It was agreed that the legal committee should be asked to study the question and proceed with steps to incorporate if it found this to be desirable. It was agreed that an Advisory Board of prominent leaders from all parts of the state should be set up. The Acting Executive Secretary was made chairman of a 12 �nominating committee and asked to bring in a proposed slate of officers and Advisory Board members for consideration by the Executive Board. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETS (The Steering Committee had now become a part of the Executive Committee.) A third meeting was held in Richmond on January 31, 1959. The committee heard reports of successful efforts to form local committees in Alexandria, Fairfax County-Falls Church, Newport News and the surrounding Peninsula area, Richmond and Waynesboro. The representatives from Waynesboro reported that the General Manager of the General Electric plant there, Dr. Louis Rader, had sent a letter to heads of industries and business in Virginia asking them to join in the support of the Virginia Committees for Public Schools. A statement concerning the political situation in the state was prepared, adopted, and released to the press. This state­ ment commended the Governor for the moderate position he had taken at the opening of the special session of the General Assembly earlier in the month. It also noted that the Governor was appointing a special commission for study and recommenda­ tions for legislative action and urged that this commission in­ clude outstanding leaders in the fields of education, business, and the professions. It called upon the members of the various Committees for Public Schools and the people in general to let the Governor and the General Assembly know that the preservation of the public schools was a primary condition to any solution of the problem. FOURTH MEETING A fourth meeting was held in Richmond on February 7, 1959. The greater part of this meeting was taken up by dis­ cussion of the legal situation concerning public schools and action to provide for individual and group encouragement to the Governor and to members of the General Assembly who were known to be champions of public schools. Letters from the Governor and from two members of the General Assembly were read, urging the Virginia Committee for Public Schools not to relax its efforts. The Acting Executive Secretary read a proposed letter to 13 �be sent to the teachers of the state asking them to join the committee and support its efforts to preserve the public schools. The letter was approved, with the suggestion that a similar letter be sent to leaders in other groups such as the Association of American University Women, the League of Women Voters, the Ministerial Associations, etc. Dr. Buck also ex­ plained steps he had taken to enlist the support of educators in the colleges of the state. The Executive Committee approved the suggestion that a budget for financing state committee activities be prepared and that all local committees be required to subscribe a share of the financial aid required for the budget. ORGANIZATION COMPLETED At the fifth meeting of the Steering Committee (now Executive Committee), on February 14, the election of per­ manent officers completed the organization of the Virginia Committee for Public Schools. The officers elected were: President-------------Dr. J. L. Blair Buck, of Richmond Vice Presidents---- Mr. Edmund Campbell, of Arlington Judge H . G. Cochran, of Norfolk Col. Francis Pickens Miller, of Charlottesvills M r. Knox Turnbull, of Charlottesville T reasurer------------ Dr. James R. Sydnor, of Richmond Secretary------------- Mr. Eugene Pickett, of Richmond M r. William Lightsey of Arlington was appointed full­ time Executive Secretary. The committee was advised that the Fairfax-Falls Church Committee for Public Schools had been formally organized on February 8, at a public meeting attended by over 800. Dr. Buck reported that a letter had been sent to 64 local education associations, requesting teachers to become members of the Committee and to aid in recruiting other members. A similar letter was sent to college faculties. The Membership Committee chairman reported that his committee had met in Front Royal on February 9. The state was divided into four areas and a member of the committee was assigned to carry out extensive work in each area. Twentytwo localities were chosen for immediate attention because in­ dividuals in those localities had already evidenced interest in forming local committees. 14 �Mr. Lightsey, the newly-appointed Executive Secretary, reviewed plans for helping organize committees in Lynchburg and Roanoke, for increasing statewide publicity, and for main­ taining close contact with members of the Governor’s special Commission on Education and with other members of the General Assembly. It was agreed that the Committee needed to study the various legislative proposals that were under consideration by the Governor’s (Perrow) Commission and decide upon the position to be taken by the committee. A set of proposals pre­ pared by the legal sub-committee of the Arlington committee was distributed. It was agreed that these proposals would be studied in the various local committees and the positions of the local committees developed and reported at the next meeting. With the organization of the Virginia Committees for Public Schools completed, subsequent meetings of the Execu­ tive Committee were devoted to plans for spreading the local committee to other areas of the state, and to legislative and political action during the special session of the General As­ sembly. Expanding The Movement One of the most important services of the Virginia Com­ mittee is that of giving advice and assistance in the organization of local committees. Membership in the Virginia Committee for Public Schools is urged for individuals in areas which have no or­ ganized local committee. As membership cards come in to local committees and “at large” membership cards from unorgan­ ized areas come in to the state office, these members are asked to send in the names and addresses of acquaintances living in other parts of. the state who might be interested in membership in the Virginia Committee for Public Schools. Letters with enclosed membership cards sent to leaders of local Parent-Teacher Associations, Virginia Education Associa­ tions, League of Women Voters, AAUW, Ministerial Associa­ tions, and similar organizations are another means of recruit­ ing membership in unorganized areas. The initial action to organize a local committee in a given area has not been dictated necessarily by the number of mem­ bership cards on file for individuals in that area. However, 15 �when over 25 membership cards are on file from a particular unorganized area, efforts are made to organize a local com­ mittee. Experience has shown that there is no set pattern or pro­ cedure that can be followed by the state organization in render­ ing effective assistance to the organization of local committees. The several plans that have worked successfully can best be explained by giving the following examples of local com­ mittees already organized. STATE COMMITTEE INITIATIVE (Examples: Lynchburg and Washington County) The state organization had received a number of membership cards from the area and had also had expressions of interest in organizing a local committee from one or more of those members. Working with one or two members from the area, a list of all persons in the area who might be interested was prepared. A letter was sent from the state office to every per­ son on this list, asking him to attend a discussion meeting at a given time and place. W ith this letter went informational ma­ terial concerning the Committees for Public Schools—the who, what, and why of these organizations, a list of the Advisory Board of the Virginia Committee, and a statement of the need for such organizations. At this first meeting the President or Executive Secretary of the Virginia Committee explained the mechanics of or­ ganization of a local committee. Samples of by-laws and other materials from other local committees were distributed and discussed. A local leader suggested at the meeting that an organizing committee be elected by those present and given authority to draw up proposed by-laws and appoint a nominat­ ing committee for officers for a local committee. From this point the local organizing committee carried through and ar­ ranged for a formal organizational meeting. After that the local committee was in business. LOCAL COMMUNITY INITIATIVE (Examples: Blacksburg, Newport News, Radford, and Rockingham County.) Usually one, sometimes several, inter­ ested individuals recognize the need for organizing people who are concerned about the threat to public schools. They ask for 16 �advice from the state organization and get material and other help from the leaders of nearby local committees already or­ ganized. In these cases an organizing group is formed at a meeting of those who have indicated an interest. At a later meeting, usually open to the public, formal organization is ac­ complished by adoption of by-laws and the election of officers. INITIATION BY NEIGHBORING COMMITTEES (Examples: Alexandria, Blacksburg, and Fairfax-Falls Church.) Leaders in local committees already organized ap­ proach community leaders in a nearby community and offer as­ sistance in organizing a local committee, selling the need for organizing. The same pattern of setting up an organizing group and arranging for formal organization is used as when the state organization provides assistance, except that advice and assistance is given by the leadership of the nearby local com­ mittee. ( If local committees can be persuaded to devote more effort to this activity, the effect of their own work is multiplied and the organization of local committees throughout the state can be accomplished more quickly and at less expense.) Legislative Activity N O T E: Most of the legislative activity described herein centers around the 1958 special session of the General Assembly, par­ ticularly the crucial 28 days in April when that body was consider­ ing the legislation recommended by the so-called “ Pcrrow Com­ mission.” The strong voice of the Committees for Public Schools was heard time and again during the recent special session of the General Assembly. Through letters and statements at public hearings by representatives of the Virginia Committees for Public Schools and local committees from all parts of the state, and through the thousands of telephone calls, telegrams, letters and personal contacts from individual members through­ out the state, the Governor and members of the General As­ sembly were made increasingly aware of the fact that the 25,000 members of the Committees for Public Schools were not willing to sacrifice Virginia’s system of public schools. It was only after the formation of the Committees for Public Schools that for the first time in more than three years the noise of the “massive resisters” was offset by the great 17 �moderate body of citizens who realized the absolute necessity for providing public education for all. Differences among members of the General Assembly divided the House and the Senate almost evenly. Members of both houses have said that the legislative activity of the Com­ mittees for Public Schools and its members played a vital part in securing the passage of the Almond-Perrow legislation. Without the work and interest of the Committees for Public Schools, Virginia might now be facing the prospect of no state system of public education. CHRONOLOGICAL ACCOUNT Following is a chronological account of the legislative ac­ tivities of representatives of the Virginia Committee for Public Schools: February 9 On the basis of action taken at the February 7th meet­ ing of the Executive Board, a letter was sent to Governor Almond, commending him for the position he had taken on behalf of public education. February 16 A letter was sent to each member of the Perrow Commis­ sion offering the support of the Committees for Public Schools for all constructive proposals of the Commission, and express­ ing concern for the preservation of Sections 129 and 133 of the State Constitution. February 27 The Executive Board and the legal committee developed a statement for presentation at the public hearing before the Perrow Commission on March 6. March 6 The President of the Virginia Committee for Public Schools made a statement at the public hearing before the Perrow Commission. H e expressed appreciation for the con­ structive manner in which the Commission was approaching its task. H e asked for maximum local autonomy, enactment of a compulsory attendance law, adequate safeguards in the disposal of surplus school facilities, and preservation of a state system of public education. Similar statements were made by represen­ tatives of local Committees for Public Schools from Alex18 �andria, Arlington, Blacksburg, Charlottesville, Fairfax-Falls Church, Norfolk, Richmond and Warren County. O f 66 per­ sons making statements at the public hearing, 40 spoke in favor of the maintenance of the public school system. April 1 Chairmen of local Committees were advised by telegram or telephone to withhold for three or four days any statements of position on the Perrow Commission report. This was done on advice of friendly legislators and to permit time to study and analyze the report. April 4 The Executive Board and the Legal Committee met in Richmond to develop a statement of position on the Perrow Commission report. April 6 A statement on behalf of the Virginia Committee for Public Schools was delivered to the Governor and laid on the desks of each member of the General Assembly when it re­ convened at noon. This statement expressed the opinion that the Commission recommendations constituted the best plan yet advanced for meeting the problems resulting from the deseg­ regation orders of the Federal Courts. It urged resistance to all efforts to delete or alter the constitutional guarantees of free public education. It asked for a strengthening of proposed legislation relating to disposal of surplus property, compulsory attendance, and transportation of children attending non-sec­ tarian private schools. April 13 The President of the Virginia Committee appeared at a hearing before the House Committee considering the pupil placement bill. On behalf of the committee he urged approval of the total program recommended by the Perrow Commission. April 13 An urgent appeal was sent by telephone and telegram to the local committees, requesting that letters and telegrams be sent to the Governor and legislators in opposition to the Wheatley Resolution. This resolution proposed constitutional amendments which would remove all requirements for the maintenance of public schools. 19 �April 14 The Executive Secretary of the Virginia Committee for Public Schools appeared at a public hearing before the Senate Committee considering the pupil assignment and compulsory attendance bills, and asked for approval of these parts of the Perrow Commission program as the best plan for meeting the widely varied problems of the State. April 15 Two memoranda were delivered to the Governor and each member of the General Assembly transmitting analyses of the effects of the constitutional amendments proposed in the Wheatley Resolution. It was interesting to note that in subse­ quent debates on the floors of the House and Senate, members used many statements from these analyses. April 16 A telephone appeal was made to a number of the local committees asking that their members immediately wire, tele­ phone or write certain legislators in their areas. This was done at the urgent request of friendly legislators. April 17 A prominent member of the Advisory Board of the Vir­ ginia Committee for Public Schools, made a statement at the Public Hearing before the House Committee on Privileges and Elections in opposition to the Wheatley Resolution. Spokes­ men for the following local Committees for Public Schools also made statements at the hearing: Alexandria, Lynchburg, Arlington, Norfolk, Rockingham County, Washington County, Newport News, and Fairfax-Falls Church. Although the Com­ mittee on Privileges and Elections reported the Resolution favorably, four members reserved the right to vote against it on the floor. The Resolution was defeated in the House the fol­ lowing Monday by the close vote of 53 to 45. There seems to be little question but that the strong showing made by the Com­ mittees for Public Schools contributed to the defeat of the Resolution. April 28 An original letter was mailed to the Governor, to each member of the House who voted against the Wheatley Resolu­ tion, and to each of the 20 Senators who stood by the Almond20 �Perrow program, expressing the appreciation of the Virginia Committee for Public Schools. Subsequent Activity Since the close of the special session of the General As­ sembly, which enacted legislation substantially in accord with the recommendations of the Perrow Commission, the legis­ lative activity of the Committee has been devoted primarily to explanation of the new legislation to its membership and to the public. An even more important responsibility which is being met by the Committees for Public Schools is in the field of politics. Local committees were urged to use all possible means to en­ couraging citizens to vote in the July primaries and the general election in November and to participate in the nominating con­ ventions, to endeavor to insure the election to the General As­ sembly, and to local Boards, of those candidates whose posi­ tions are unequivocally in favor of continued state and local responsibility for public education. 21 �Tine Committee For Public Schools Looks Ahead The job ahead for the Committees for Public Schools in Virginia is clearly set forth in a May 13, 1959 report to local committees from the President and Executive Secretary of the Virginia Committee for Public Schools, as follows: N eed fo r C on tin u in g a nd E x p a n d in g S ta te and Local C om m ittees By a margin of one vote in the State Senate the Almond-Perrow pro­ gram was enacted into law. A change of four votes in the House would have gained approval of the Wheatley Resolution with its abortive con­ stitutional amendments. Recent statements by the still strong and vocal “massive resisters” show that they continue to hope and work for a change in this line-up — to make it possible to abandon state responsibility for public schools when the General Assembly meets next January. Our state and local committees must remain active and grow strong­ er. One of our major and immediate responsibilities is to nullify the efforts of the extremists in the coming primary and in the general election — and to insure that those legislators who stood firm on behalf of public education continue to hear from those of us who share the conviction that, above all, the State must discharge its responsibility for the education of its children. T he local committees have another extremely important task. Re­ cently enacted legislation places in the hands of local school boards and lo­ cal governing bodies complete power to determine whether public schools as we know them will be continued, or will be starved to a hollow, worse-than- . useless pretense. Our local committees are vitally needed as a rallying point for those thinking people in the community who recognize the disaster that must inevitably follow abandonment o f the local public schools. As the trag­ edy in Front Royal indicates, disaster can follow in any community which fails, before the crisis, to organize a strong group of citizens who realize the damaging results of closed public schools. SU G G E ST E D LOCAL CO M M T TEE A C T IV IT IE S FO R SU M M ER M O N TH S (a) P olitic a l A ction Immediately urge your membership to actively support those candidates for local and state office whose past records or unequivocal public statements identify them as supporters of open, unimpaired public schools and contin­ ued State responsibility for public education. Urge their active opposition to those candidates who are identified as holding opposite views. (See General Assembly voting record attached.) (b ) In fo rm in g yo u r m em bersh ip Consider ways and means of informing your membership of the impor­ tant 1 e g i s l a t i v e activity of the state and local Committees for Public Schools during the special session of the General Assembly. Thank them for the individual letters and telegrams they sent the Governor and those legisla­ tors who supported their views. Alert them to the probable need for similar ac­ tivity before and during the next session of the Assembly. Information to your membership can be accomplished through a written report mailed to all 22 �members, through news media publicity, through open “letters to the editor” from your chairman sent to local newspapers, through telephone committees, or combinations of these means. (c) In cre a se th e num ber of y o u r m em bers Have the officers of your committee talk in person with the local leaders of civic and school groups. Ask to appear at their meetings to explain the work of our committees and the importance of their growth and expansion. Take membership cards along and pass them out at these meetings. (It is particu­ larly important that an early personal contact be made with the newly-elec­ ted P-TA presidents.) (d) P rovide fo r rep re s e n ta tio n a t S ta te C om m ittee E x ecu tiv e B oard M eetings The success we have in gaining our objectives will be directly related to the growth in our state membership and the expansion of local committees in other communities. This growth and expansion can occur only with careful planning and direction by a strong state central group. It is important that each local committee arrange to name a representative who can at­ tend meetings of the State Executive Board. It is expected that this Board will meet about three times between nowand September 1. Wherever pos­ sible the same representative from each local Committee should attend all meetings. In this connection, please note that the following paragraphs 5 and 6 point up the need for the Executive Board assuming more respon­ sibility for the administration of State Committee activities. (e ) A ssist in o rg an iz in g locals in n earby com m unities With the necessity for reducing the operations of the State office and our inability to continue a full-time Executive Secretary, extension work can be continued only if those local committees already organized will accept the re­ sponsibility of encouraging and assisting with the organization of committees in communities near them. Suggestions as to ways of accomplishing this and a list of names of persons who have already evidenced interest in other com­ munities will be sent to each local committee in the near future. ( f) C ontinue financial su p p o rt o f S ta te C om m ittee The work of the State Committee must be supported almost entirely by funds received from local committees. There is a great need for each local committee to strive to send additional funds to the State Committee as quickly as possible. Even if your accepted assessment has been met, any additional amount that can be spared is needed. 23 �This booklet is available from the address below a t the following rates, postpaid: single copies, 15c each; 10 copies or more, 10c each; 100 copies or more, IVic each. THE MESSENGER PRESS BOX 312 MANASSAS, 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 19, The Personal Papers of Elizabeth Pfohl Campbell Description An account of the resource This collection consists of the personal papers of Elizabeth Pfohl Campbell, and covers the period from 1945 through 1991, with the bulk of the material falling between 1947 and 1959. The materials in this collection were generated or collected as a result of Mrs. Campbell's involvement in the Arlington County School Board, as well as her interests and activities in education and local politics. 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 Booklet: "Organizing To Save Public Schools 1956-1959. How Virginians rallied to the defense of the public school system in the Virginia Committee for Public Schools", by William Marion Lightsey. 14 pages. Description An account of the resource The purpose of the Virginia Committee for Public Schools "...We affirm our determined support of free public education for every child in Virginia. We believe this should continue to be guarantied by the Constitution of Virginia." Booklet describes and explains the development of the Virginia Committee For Public Schools from three local committees to a Statewide organization of 25,000 members. Describes and explains the purpose of the committee to keep Public Schools open in Virginia in spite of the use of "massive resistance" against Court ordered desegregation of public schools. Recounts the work of the Committee chronologically and legally. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource No Date Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 19, The Personal Papers of Elizabeth Pfohl Campbell Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Virginia Committee for Public Schools and William Marion Lightsey 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. nauthorized 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 19_1_12_1 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/ad8b2aafcb62db9ac2d06ce67ade3d40.pdf 08fcfa17754d5f5d5960eb007e051f98 PDF Text Text V irginia C o m m itte e for PnM ie Schools ROOM 3 , BROAD-GRACE ARCADE Richmond 19, Virginia T elephone M I lton 9-0559 A dvisory Board Mr. Wilson M. Brown Richmond Mrs. J. L. Blair Buck Richmond Mrs. Margaret Denny Dixon Richmond Mrs. Douglas S. Freeman Richmond Rabbi Ariel Goldburg, D.D. Richmond Mr. Newman Hamblet Richmond Most Rev. Joseph H. Hodges, D.D. Richmond Rt. Rev. W. H. Marmion, D.D. Roanoke, Va. Dr. Peter Mellette Richmond Col. Francis Pickens Miller Charlottesville Mr. Benjamin Muse Manassas Mr. Louis Spilman Waynesboro Mr. Beecher E. Stallard Richmond Mr. Louis Rader Waynesboro Mr. Knox Turnbull Charlottesville February 23, 1959 Dear Executive Board Members A most important meeting of the Executive Board of the Virginia Committee for Public Schools has been called for Friday afternoon, February 27, at 3:00 PM at the M C A , 2 V . Franklin St., Richmond. / It seemed urgently necessary to call this meeting to discuss the legislative position of the Virginia Committee and the statements that might be made for the Committee before the Perrow Commission at the Public Hearing to be held March 6. This will be explored in detail at the Friday meeting, Those attending should plan on the meeting con­ I1 tinuing until 9 or 10 P . The State legal Committee will meet with the Executive Board. Ur. Ed Campbell, legal committee chairman, has asked that each community group who desires to do so, name a legal representative who can attend the Friday meeting and serve on the legal committee. A c tin g E xecutive S e c re ta ry J. L. Blair Buck Richmond In the meantime, all who will attend the Fri­ day meeting are asked to review the legal study made by Mr. T/arren Cox, legal committee chairman of the Arlington group. Come prepared to express your opinions of the suggestions in this report and bring in other suggestions resulting from your local studies and discussions. (Those who did not get copies of the T/arren Cox report Saturday are being sent copies with this letter.) The Perrow Commission has named 9 subject areas in which statements at the Public Hearing will be considered appropriate. A list of these is attached. Our discussions Friday will be di­ rected to these subject areas. One of the most important questions we must consider is "Y7hat should be the position of our Committee if a locality desires to abandon its public schools, thus leaving no means of public education available in the community?" l/e believe the local Committees will want to appear at the Public Hearing. Members of the S te e rin g C om m ittee: H. W. Tullock, Waynesboro; Mrs. Vernon Weihe, Arlington; Roy Sloop, Newport News; James C. Brewer, Norfolk; W. B. Shepheard, Norfolk; James R. Sydnor, Richmond; 1. A. Rolston, Charlottesville; John Fitzgerald, Front Royal; J. L. Blair Buck, Richmond. A f f iu x te d C om m ittees: Alexandria, Arlington, Blacksburg, Charlottesville, Fairfax, Front Royal, Newport News, Norfolk, Richmond. �- 2- Coxnmission have -suggested to us that these requests should be sent in AT ONCE, addressed to "Ur. John B. Boatwright, Jr., Secretary, Perrow Commission on Education, State Capitol, Richmond 19, Virginia. Your request to be heard should give the name of the person who will speak, his address, occupation and legal residence, and the name of your local organization. State how much time you desire, the subject to be covered and include an outline of any concrete proposals you expect to make. If you do not have all this information now, it may be wise to send in an initial request to be heard, stating that the additional in­ formation will be furnished by March 3, but MAKE YOUR REQUEST NOW if you expect to be heard. Sincerely, William I . Lightsey I Executive Secretary Virginia Committee for Public Schools WML/ssh � 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 19, The Personal Papers of Elizabeth Pfohl Campbell Description An account of the resource This collection consists of the personal papers of Elizabeth Pfohl Campbell, and covers the period from 1945 through 1991, with the bulk of the material falling between 1947 and 1959. The materials in this collection were generated or collected as a result of Mrs. Campbell's involvement in the Arlington County School Board, as well as her interests and activities in education and local politics. 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 William M. Lightsey, Executive Secretary, Virginia Committee for Public Schools to the Executive Board Members, February 24, 1959. Description An account of the resource Letter announcing an important meeting of the Committee to discuss the legislative position and the statements that might be made at a public hearing before the "Perrow Commission on Education" on March 6. Asking for each local committee to name a legal representative to serve on the legal committee. Major issue is what should e the Committee's position if a locality desires to abandon its public schools. Also asking for speakers for public hearing. 2 pages. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2/24/59 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 19, The Personal Papers of Elizabeth Pfohl Campbell Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource William M. Lightsey 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. nauthorized 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 19_2_7_1_1 https://projectdaps.org/files/original/a44a53f6fe7a74a6f2ffc5e221afb23c.pdf a5d6dd81fc80a9de20c9520d5bc55cad PDF Text Text SUBJECT AREAS THAT :iAT BE DISCUSSED AT riARCii 6 PUBLIC HEARING 1. Enrollment and transfer of pupils. This would cover the existing Virginia Pupil Placement Act and any alternative plans for handling the assignment or placing of children in the schools. 2. Local budgets and appropriations for public schools or other educa­ tional activities. 3. Teacher status, pupil attendance (whether compulsory or not), pupil activities and transportation. 4. Disposal of surplus school property. school facilities closed or abandoned. This would include any public 5. Pupil preference plans. This would involve the three-phase systan, in which pupils might have a choice whether to attend an integrated school, an all-Negro school or an all-white school. 6. Grants-in-aid and aid to education generally. Involved here is a review of present tuition grant laws designed to help educate children in private non-sectarian schools. 7. Repeal of laws. This contemplates a review of whether anti­ integration laws invalidated or outdated b y court decisions should be repealed. 8. Tax problems and possible tax adjustments. This could be one of the commission's most complicated areas of study. It could involve a complete overhaul of the present state tax structure, with the adop­ tion of a general sales tax to help finance public school operations and tuition grants. Also, whether local tax changes might be made and whether tax exemptions or credits should be allowed for contribu­ tions or tuition payments to private schools. � 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 19, The Personal Papers of Elizabeth Pfohl Campbell Description An account of the resource This collection consists of the personal papers of Elizabeth Pfohl Campbell, and covers the period from 1945 through 1991, with the bulk of the material falling between 1947 and 1959. The materials in this collection were generated or collected as a result of Mrs. Campbell's involvement in the Arlington County School Board, as well as her interests and activities in education and local politics. 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 Listing of "Subject Areas that May be Discussed at March 6 Public Hearing", no date. Description An account of the resource 8 Subjects listed. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource No Date Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource pdf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived RG 19, The Personal Papers of Elizabeth Pfohl Campbell Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Virginia Committee for Public Schools 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. nauthorized 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 19_2_7_1_3