Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

page 8 —Oct. I, 1954 —SOUTHERN SCHOOL NEWS Maryland BALTIMORE, Md. A s the opening day of school drew to a close in Baltimore, school of ficials were determined to carry out in full the non-segregation policy adop ted by the Board of School Commis sioners shortly after the Supreme Court decision in the segregation cases. The heart of that policy, as ap proved by the School Board on June 10, was that “all of the standards and criteria . . . with respect to the ad mission of pupils to schools, grades, or curricula shall continue in force ex cept that the race of the pupil shall not be a consideration.” Since Baltimore has never had school districts, in the sense that the word “district” is commonly used in school matters, the policy meant that any child in Baltimore would con tinue to have the right to be admitted to any school in the city, provided the school of his choice was not al ready overcrowded. Schools are “dis tricted” in Baltimore only when they become so overcrowded that it is nec essary to limit attendance to children living in prescribed areas. The rules to be continued in re spect to transfers from one school to another were almost as lenient as those governing first admittance. Transfers because of changes of res idence were to be routinely approved. Transfers for other reasons were to be approved by the two principals in volved or by the appropriate assist ant superintendent, subject to such practical considerations as the rela tive classroom sizes in the two schools. Elaborating in advance on the transfer policy, Dr. John H. Fischer, Superintendent of Public Instruction, made it clear to the public and school principals alike that “where a near by school offers advantages to any pupil, white or Negro, over the school he now attends, and the parent re quests a transfer, the request should be granted.” The only qualifications he added were that “only in rare in stances should a young child be sent far from his home to another school and that older students in the mid dle of secondary-level or vocational programs should be transferred only whether it is clearly advisable for him to do so.” Although not publicized, it was considered a sufficient reason for transferring, other factors being equal, if a Negro parent desired his or her child to have the experience of being in a racially mixed school. And conversely, by implication, a white parent could request that his or her child be transferred to an unmixed school, if such were available. Coercion Avoided To avoid any move which might be taken as coercive, school officials had been careful to stick to any com mitments made prior to the adoption of the non-segregation policy. For example, white parents in a chang ing neighborhood had been told late in the spring that their neighborhood school would become colored in the fall and that their children, about 200 all told, would be transported to portable classrooms to be set up on the grounds of a white school about half a mile away. The parents were assured, after the non-segregation decision, that the plans for transport ing their children to the new class rooms would be honored, even though the question was raised in NAACP circles as to whether school officials in this instance were not providing free bus service so that white chil dren could avoid integration. The Baltimore plan, therefore, was in effect to have voluntary integra tion. There was to be no deliberate mixing of school populations. There was to be no compulsory integra tion, such as occurs under a district ing policy which requires all chil dren in a given area, whether white, colored or racially mixed, to attend a given school. While the designation of schools as “white” or “colored” was dropped in Baltimore, the right of parents to send their children to the school of their choice was pre served, insofar as school conditions made it possible to preserve that right The answers to two questions could not be known prior to the fall registration of students: would there be a rush of Negro pupils to enter formerly all-white schools? And what would the white reaction be? School officials believed there would be only a moderate amount of mixing and that white resistance would be negligible, but they could not be sure. Baltimore, after all, has as large a percentage of Negroes as many communities in the deep South. Of the 140,957 children in public schools, 55,331 are colored, or just over 39 per cent. And while in re cent years the Negro has taken a place beside the white man in some areas of public and private employ ment, many of the southern segre gation traditions remain. Baltimore neighborhoods for the most part are either all-white or all-Negro, and Negroes are barred, with few excep tions, from white hotels, restaurants, and places of amusement and recrea tion. Officials Guessed Right As it turned out, school officials were right on both counts. The two days of registration before school be gan, and the registration that con tinued on opening day itself, made it apparent early that there was to be no large-scale move on the Negroes’ part to enter white schools. In the few formerly white schools that were located in racially mixed neighbor hoods, the enrollments of colored children was heavy. In the majority , of white schools, however, the Negro enrollment was either light or non existent. As for the white reaction, it too was extremely light. The change was gen erally accepted without either pub lic applause or protest as one more step in the gradual emergence of Ne groes in formerly all-white fields of human activity. When preliminary enrollment fig ures were completed and released by the school board on Sept. 16, or close to the end of the second week of school, it was revealed that only 1,376 colored children, or 2.5 per cent of the total Negro enrollment, had cho sen to go to formerly all-white schools in preference to all-Negro schools. While 12 of the 20 formerly white junior and senior high schools had become “integrated,” the pro portion was very small—169 mixed with 8,287 white students. In con trast, 12,696 colored students entered or remained in all-Negro secondary schools. The largest number of Negroes on the secondary level in a formerly white school was at Southern High School, where there were 36 in a student body of 1,780. No Negroes applied for courses in the junior col lege operated as a part of the Balti more public school system. Elementary Figures On the elementary level, 38 pre viously all-white schools out of about 80 reported Negro enrollment, but again fhe total was small: 1,205 colored children in schools which had a total enrollment of 54,464. In con trast, 37,879 Negroes entered or re mained in all-Negro schools. In one elementary school which had to be districted during the sum mer because it was so crowded, and the district included both white and colored residential areas, the Negro enrollment was quite high—321 out of a student body of 703. There was also considerable mixing in four oth er elementary schools, where re spective enrollments were 105 Ne groes, 185 whites; 152 Negroes, 765 whites; 117 Negroes, 837 whites, and 107 Negroes, 168 whites. But 16 out of the 38 mixed elementary schools had less than 10 colored children in at tendance, and five of these 16 had only one Negro apiece. The other side of the integration picture—the entrance of white stu dents into previously all-Negro schools—was almost too limited to be mentioned. The reverse movement occurred in only three elementary schools, which had enrollments, re spectively, of 1 white student, 1,108 Negroes; 3 whites, 557 Negroes; and 2 whites, 1,291 Negroes. These three schools, to keep the total picture in SUPT. JOHN H. FISHER Baltimore Follows His Lead perspective, were considered as col ored schools in the figures above per taining to how many Negroes re mained in colored schools as opposed to those who entered previously all- white schools. At only one public school was there trouble which may or may not have been stimulated in part by ra cial feelings. The school was one which had served a public housing project for Negro war workers. The housing project was in an advance stage of abandonment and demoli tion, leaving only 107 Negro children in the school. The overflow of chil dren in a large, new white school in the area was, therefore, assigned to the formerly Negro school. On opening day, the parents af about one-third of the white pupils kept their children out of the school, protesting that it needed repairs and painting, that the playground was in poor shape and that an open cesspool nearby created a hazard. School Superintendent John Fisch er took personal charge of the situa tion ordering immediate repairs and painting and conducting a poll to see whether white parents wanted their children to remain in the school or be transferred to all-white schools which, physically more attractive, would necessarily have larger num bers of pupils per classroom. Some observers felt that behind the protest strike lay resentment over the assignment of white children to a previously Negro school. If so, the results of the poll did not show that the resentment was widespread. More than half of the white parents elect ed to have their children remain in the school, and the remainder were transferred to two other schools. The final enrollment: 107 Negroes, 168 white children. So Other Incidents Except for this episode, Baltimore’s school integration program went ahead, in the words of school board President Walter Sondheim, Jr., “. . . so smoothly there is no need for com ment.” The professional school staff has echoed these sentiments, saying that there have been no unusual in cidents to report as yet. The typical reaction among Negroes was probably expressed by one mother whose small child was admitted to a previously white school across the street whereas formerly she would have had to walk a dozen downtown blocks. “This means a great deal to me,” the moth er said. “Now I won’t have to worry about traffic.” The headmaster of a large private school in Baltimore, checked for SERS, reported that he had received no applications from parents seeking private education for their children to avoid having them in racially mixed public school classes, and he said he had heard of no rush of appli cants to other private white schools in the Baltimore area. The Catholic schools in the city went on a non- segregated basis at the same time as the public schools. Dr. J. Carey Taylor, assistant school superintendent in charge of secondary education, said, when asked to comment on the small num ber of Negro transfers, that school principals may have discouraged some moves by pointing out the long er distances to be traveled and dis advantageous classroom sizes. Par ents had the right of appeal to him, however, if principals had declined to approve a move. Dr. Taylor said that no more than half a dozen such cases had been referred to his admin istrative level, and all but one of these requests had been granted. Most of the referrals were from one school where the white principal has shown indications of not being in sympathy with integration. Dr. Taylor believes that the small number of Negro transfers is proof that most pupils still prefer to go to schools nearest their homes, if not because of friends and associations, then because of the time and money saved in transportation to distant schools. Another reason, frequently cited, is that colored schools in Bal timore have been made as nearly equal to white schools as possible, so that in many instances there are no particular advantages to changing . Dr. Bernard Harris, Sr., Negro member of the school board, said in an interview for the SERS that as far as he knew “everyone was get ting what he wanted.” A vigorous proponent of Negro rights, Dr. Har ris said he had received only one complaint of a Negro child not being treated fairly, and he would not com ment on it because he said he was not yet certain that the complaint was justified. Dr. Harris explained the small per centage of Negroes in formerly white schools by saying that both the white and Negro populations in Baltimore appreciate that the mixing must be done slowly. He said the Negro com munity had accepted school integra tion “soberly” and wanted it to stick. He added that Negro parents were watching how the colored children in predominantly white schools were making out and that next year more mixing might take place. NAACP leaders in Baltimore also had no complaints about the way in tegration had progressed. A possible issue had suggested itself back in July, when no Negro teachers had been assigned to white or mixed classes at the time when the school board announced that all vacancies for the fall term were filled. But new vacancies occurred between July and the opening of school, and two math ematics positions in a practically solid white junior high school were assigned to Negro teachers, plus a French post in another white school. School officials are moving with great caution in this phase of the integra tion program, but they are moving. Two more Negro teachers are sched uled to take over predominantly white classes in October. While school officials were quietly congratulating themselves on the un troubled first weeks of their integra tion policy, legal action was threaten ing. The National Association for the Advancement of White People and its local affiliate, the Maryland Petition Committee, filed a mandamus suit in the Superior Court of Baltimore City to force the city to maintain sep arate schools for Negroes with Negro teachers. Judge John T. Tucker gave the school board 15 days to show cause why it should not be required to continue segregated schools. The grounds for the NAAWP action were not published, so it could not be im mediately established whether or not the Baltimore suit was closely akin to that brought earlier in the Dis trict of Columbia and rejected. Elsewhere in Maryland Elsewhere in Maryland, a situation quite different from that in Baltimore prevailed. The State Board of Educa tion, which sets the policy for schools in the counties, had indicated on May 26 its acceptance of the Supreme Court decision in a resolution which said, in part, that “no program of in tegration can be put into effect until the decision of the Supreme Court becomes final and an effective date is set by the Supreme Court.” The res olution also said, “This statement does not imply, however, that the State Board of Education and the local school authorities, upon whom the major burden of solving the problem will fall, should delay in analyzing the situation and making plans for implementing the decision of the Court.” As its own first step toward imple menting the decision, the State Board of Education early in June named a five-man committee of school su perintendents to develop an integra tion program for Maryland and to work with the attorney general’s of fice on the brief to be presented be fore the Supreme Court, when the school segregation cases are re opened. No word was forthcoming from the committee from June through the middle of September, but it was understood that the commit tee’s report, when prepared, would be substantially the same as the at torney general’s brief. State Officials Silent Except for Mr. Parker’s generalized statement of Maryland’s position and that of the State Board of Education three months earlier indicating that Maryland public schools would com ply with the Supreme Court’s de cision, when final decrees were hand ed down, state and county officials remained almost wholly silent as to just what steps would be taken when the time for desegregation comes. In this vacuum of official silence, sev eral small anti-integration groups be gan to build up a following. The Maryland Petition Committee, previously mentioned as an affiliate of the National Association for the Advancement of White People, who claimed to have signers of its anti integration petition in nearly all of Maryland’s 23 counties, after having started out in a small way at Jessups, near the District of Columbia line, in early summer. In Southern Maryland, where the percentages of Negroes in relation to total county population run high, a group in Anne Arundel County op posed to integration was circulating in late summer a West River Proc lamation, and in nearby Calvert County a States Rights Committee was distributing a Prince Frederick Resolution. Smaller groups were re ported to be active on Maryland’s eastern shore. The first large gathering of persons opposed to integration was on Sept. 15 at Southern High School in Anne Arundel County. About 400 attended the meeting, initiated by the West River group, and heard the West Riv er Proclamation read. The salient points in the proclamation are these: 1. That any action taken in this state in consequence of the recent opinion of the Supreme Court should be based only upon due process of state law sanctioned by the people through referendum, and not merely upon arbitrary or temporary office holders or appointed commissions. 2. That in order to assure equal pro tection of the law to each race and to prevent development of an inferiority complex in any child, no child shall be compelled to undertake public education under instructors not of his own race without consent of his parents or guar dians. 3. That the administration of free schools should be conducted on the prin ciple of maximum local control with the objective of the greatest satisfaction of all participating students, subordinating nei ther the majority to the minority nor the minority to the majority. 4. That to accomplish these objectives it is essential to give local populations a direct voice in the selection of their own boards of education and their school trus tees, and that these locally designated rep resentatives should retain the authority to establish equitable administrative pol icies for selection of instructors and for admission to the various schools in their responsibility and to make plans neces sary for expansion and assignment of fa- cilties. The Southern High School meet ing was called under the temporary name of the Maryland PTA Council for Separate Schools. The use of this name was immediately challenged by officials of the Maryland Congress of Parents and Teachers on the grounds that its board of governors had pre viously issued a statement that the Maryland Congress would cooperate with school agencies in bringing about compliance with the Supreme Court decision and that local PTA’s were bound by their charters not to work against a position taken by the Con gress. In the field of higher education, the University of Maryland prepared for its fall term with a new president, Dr. Wilson H. Elkins, formerly Texas, and a new policy of admitting Maryland Negroes to all undergrad uate courses. The graduate schools had previously been opened to col ored students. Dr. Elkins told reporters that the assimilation would be “very easy this year,” because of the small number of Negro applicants, and that no dis crimination in housing, classes or oth erwise would be shown them. By mid-September only seven Negroes had applied, and of these, three had been accepted, one rejected on aca demic grounds and the status of the others was still pending.