Newspaper Page Text
SOUTHERN SCHOOL NEWS —Oct. I, 1954—PAGE 9
Mississippi
JACKSON, Miss.
ISSISSIPPI voters will decide in
a special election on Dec. 21
whether to amend the constitution of
1890 so as to authorize the legislature
to abolish public schools if all other
legal steps to prevent integration of
the racially segregated system fail.
A special session of the legislature,
convened Sept. 7 by Gov. Hugh White
for the specific purpose of considering
the amendment, voted overwhelm
ingly to submit that history-making
decision to the electorate.
Although submission of the amend
ment by the legislature necessitated a
two-thirds vote in each branch on
three separate days, its ratification
requires only a majority vote of the
electors. It will be the only question
on the ballot.
Gov. White and other sponsors of
the amendment insist it will be used
only as a “last resort.” However, there
is nothing in the amendment making
it a “standby” proposal. Once ratified,
it could be put in force at the will of
the legislature.
Application of the amendment will
require a two-thirds vote of the
legislature if the question is state
wide abolition of public schools. If
the question is merely the authoriza
tion to a local school district to abolish
its schools, then the legislature can
give that consent with a simple ma
jority vote.
Broad Power Granted
Should the amendment be ratified
and the issue presented the legisla
ture, that lawmaking body would be
authorized under it to “appropriate
state funds and authorize counties,
municipalities and other governmen
tal subdivisions and districts to ap
propriate funds, including poll tax
and 16th section funds, to aid edu-
cable children of this state to secure
an education.” That is the provision
sponsors believe would enable the
state to vote funds directly to the
children for their attendance in
schools of their choice—segregated,
integrated or private.
To make existing school facilities
available to whatever substitute sys
tem is set up, the amendment pro
vides that the legislature “shall be
and is hereby authorized and em
powered to enact suitable legislation
to dispose of school buildings, land
and other school property by lease,
sale or otherwise.”
Sponsors of the amendment point
out that a new section which would
be in the constitution if the amend
ment is ratified, safeguards the pub
lic school system so long as it is segre
gated. It provided:
would be unfaithful to our solemn
trust if we should feel otherwise.”
“We will meet this threat without
faltering; by our joint efforts we shall
unitedly find the solution. We shall
not fail our heritage.”
Gov. White said “very few were
prepared for the blow which so preci
pitately fell” on Monday morning,
May 17, 1954, when the United States
Supreme Court decision banning seg
regation was handed down.
An unanimous court saw fit to try to
destroy every precedent of the past; it
ignored the findings of fact of the trial
courts; it usurped the legislative func
tions of the Congress specifically provided
by the 14th amendment itself, and it em
braced as the supreme law of the land
the unsworn, personal theories of five or
six sociologists, the chief of whom was
a Swede, Myrdall, who have never lived
in the United States, much less in the
South.
The people of Mississippi were shocked
and stunned. There were no overt demon
strations, but I know I am correct in say
ing that there was universal resolution
not to abide by such an unreasonable
decision if lawful means could be found
by which to avoid it.
Logic and Merit
Gov. White said “the thinking be
hind this amendment is unanswer
able, both as to logic and merit.”
The United States Supreme Court has
deliberately proposed to tell us how we
must operate our public schools, although
they have not yet spelled out the details.
We know it cannot force us to operate
schools if we do not desire to do so.
There is absolutely no desire to abandon
our public schools; there is absolutely no
present intention to do so.
Let me make it perfectly clear that
there likewise is no intention of being
unjustifiably forced to mix the races in
our schools.
Governor White closed his message
to the legislature as follows:
We have lived through civil war, under
the bayonet of the unsympathetic con
queror, through economic slavery for
white and black alike, and through all
manner of troubles; but our spirit, which
is our own and which no power on earth
can take from us, has remained unbroken.
In this we find comfort, inspiration,
humility and courage. May we never
yield, and may success crown our united
efforts is my humble prayer.
Opposition was based on absence
from the amendment of any provision
for its use as a “last resort.” Also it
was pointed out that if the state
vacates the public education field, the
federal government could step in and
finance integrated schools.
Rep. Joel Blass of Stone county
(4,899 whites, 1,363 Negroes) in op
posing the amendment said “the real
choice is between public and private
schools in some counties and between
public schools and no schools in
others.” He said that without tax sup
ported schools, many of the poorer
comities would suffer, since they now
depend on the richer political sub
divisions for equalizing funds.
Sen. William Matthews of Magee
in Simpson county (14,549 white,
7,267 Negroes), a proponent, said the
amendment “may not be a complete
answer to our problem, but at least it
will delay integration and we are
willing to pay almost any price to
prevent that.”
Sen. W. B. Alexander of Cleveland
in Bolivar county (19,868 whites,
42,945 Negroes) touched on the issue
which brought about the Supreme
Court decision—inequities between
the dual system despite the constitu
tional provision for “separate but
equal.” He voted for the amendment
after making this statement on the
floor:
Everybody who votes for this amend
ment has a co-equal responsibility to fi
nance a program of adequate schools for
the colored citizens of this state. The only
way to maintain segregation is to give
the colored people equal schools and when
we vote for this amendment we are in
effect pledging to do that when we meet
again.
Committee Proposal
The amendment was recommended
to Gov. White for submission to the
special session by a 25-member Legal
Educational Advisory Committee
created at the 1954 regular legislative
session to prepare a plan for the pre
servation of segregation, notwith
standing the decision of the Supreme
Court. Gov. White, leading state of
ficials including the attorney general,
members of the legislature and out
standing state lawyers composed the
committee.
That committee was set up in
anticipation of an adverse Supreme
Court decision by the regular session
in April this year.
Following adoption of the resolu
tion submitting the amendment to the
voters in the Dec. 21 special election,
the legislature voted to continue ex
istence of the LEAC.
However, a proposal to vote it
$100,000 to finance a statewide cam
paign to seek voter ratification was
rejected by the lawmakers. The op
position said the decision should be
left with the people without a paid
“campaign of propaganda” by the
state.
The rejected proposal would have
authorized the educational advisory
group to spend the funds for “pamph
lets and literature, paid speakers and
in arranging meetings in the 82 coun
ties.” Leading the fight against it was
Rep. Joe Wroten of Washington
county (23,436 white, 46,821 Negroes),
the son of a Methodist minister.
The house then followed with
adoption of its own resolution (HR 6)
by Rep. Icey Day of Attala county
(15,084 whites, 11,565 Negroes), in
which those who voted for the con
stitutional amendment agreed “that
they and each of them will use such
means at his or her command as may
be deemed necessary to inform the
people of their respective counties of
the provisions, purposes and intent of
said proposed amendment, and that
they will use their best efforts to
cause to be held public meetings in
the various precinct in their respec
tive counties at which said amend
ment may be presented and explained
to the people.”
Concurrent Resolution
Then as an assurance to the people
that all efforts will be made to con
tinue public schools with adequate
support if the amendment is ratified,
both branches adopted a concurrent
resolution (HCR. 13) by House
Speaker Walter Sillers of Bolivar
county, member of the educational
advisory committee and drafter of the
amendment submitted by it. The re
solution states:
It is the sense of the legislature, in
event of the adoption by the people and
insertion in the constitution of the
amendment, that an adequate and pro
gressive support and building program
shall be enacted so as to provide ample
school facilities for the school children
of Mississippi.
Gov. White has said he will call a
special session early next year to vote
the necessary funds if the amendment
is ratified. He said the session would
not otherwise be called because he
does not favor voting further funds
for schools “under existing laws
without the protective features of the
constitutional amendment.”
A special session is necessary if
support funds for common schools to
operate in the 1955-56 session are
made available. That results from ac
tion at the 1954 regular session in
voting funds for only the current year
pending the then anticipated Supreme
Court ruling.
The next regular session is not un
til January of 1956.
‘Voluntary’ Plan Seen
Proponents of the amendment and
the plan to vote funds at a special
session next year—contingent on the
amendment being ratified—feel that
with sufficient funds to launch a
building program for Negro schools
leaders of that race will agree to a
“voluntary segregation” plan and
continuance of the present dual sys
tem. That is their belief despite re
fusal of Negro leaders attending a
July 30 bi-racial conference called by
Gov. White to agree to any plan that
would circumvent the Supreme
Court’s ruling.
Some of the Negro leaders attend
ing that meeting have since said
publicly that with their system equal
ized in all phases—opportunities,
salaries, transportation and facilities
—“90 per cent of the problem will be
solved.”
Another piece of “segregation sup-
Regardless of any provisions of Article
® (providing for tax-supported separate
but equal schools for the races) or any
other provisions of this constitution to
(he contrary, the legislature may author
ize the establishment, suport, main
tenance and operation of public schools.
Under that section, supporters of
the amendment believe that as a
school system is authorized and suc
cessfully attacked, then another can
he authorized to delay integration
through lengthy legal contests.
White Issues Challenge
When Gov. White officially pres
ented the proposal to the special ses
sion in a message to a joint meeting
of the house and senate on Sept. 7, he
challenged the membership to resist
integrated public schools “with the
same legal right the National Asso
ciation for the Advancement of Col-
^ >eo Pl e exercised in contesting
e unanimous court decisions of over
o half century upholding segrega
tion.”
i , ^ant to say here that there is no
ention to "defy” the Supreme Court.
rich?* 6 sim P'y exercising the same legal
gnt to resist this most unfortunate deci-
W that the NAACP exercised in con-
ln g the unanimous court decisions of
ov ®f a half century.
• y,; e - v resisted these sound decisions; we
au now resist this one by every legal
Weans at our command.
Asserting that “we now have a
cr ^ s which we did not seek but
which we alone can solve,” Gov.
hite told the lawmakers that “for
Wy part, and I know you concur in the
eeung, the solution is worth the ef-
°rt, regardless of difficulties, and we
‘Citizens Councils’ Are Established
JACKSON, Miss.
^Organization of “Citizens Councils”
in Mississippi’s 82 counties, com
posed of “reliable white male citizens
dedicated to upholding racial segre
gation,” was revealed in a speech on
the floor of the Mississippi House of
Representatives in the current spe
cial session, Sept. 7-30.
The disclosure was by Mrs. Wilma
Sledge, representative from Sunflow
er County, after newspaper reports
of the existence of the councils. She
explained her statement was due to
the fact that newspapers revealed
that the first council was organized at
Indianola on July 11, 1954, in the
county she represents in the legisla
ture.
Mrs. Sledge said the councils “are
a widespread group of local organi
zations composed of reliable white
male citizens who believe that segre
gation is not discrimination and are
organized for the sole purpose of
maintaining segregation of the races.”
“These councils will maintain seg
regation through unity of purpose,
consolidation of public opinion, and
utilization of all legal means avail
able,” she explained. “They do not
and will not advocate violence in any
form.”
The Delta representative said “the
existence and purpose of each coun
cil is non-secretive; however, there
are some operations of the councils
which for obvious reasons cannot be
publicized. Such operations will be
legal.”
A form letter of invitation for
membership states that the members
are “freedom-loving Americans who
believe in separation of the races
with liberty for both.”
“We plan to organize and unite all
local patriotic white citizens to direct
and support our local and state offi
cials,” the prospectus states.
Each council will have four major
committees. The committees and
their functions are, according to a
mimeographed form sent prospective
members, as follows:
1. Political and Elections Committee. It
will screen all candidates in local and
state elections against those who might
be seeking the Negro vote. If necessary,
organize a white private election within
the group to combat the Negro bloc vote.
Discourage Negro registration by every
legal means.
2. Information and Education Commit
tee. Gather information pertaining to
segregation from all over the nation. Seek
facts to present to the people. Educate all
citizens, black and white, to the advan
tages of segregation and the dangers of
integration.
3. Membership and Finance Committee.
Seeks white patriotic voters for member
ship. “We must mobilize public opinion."
Annual dues, $5.00.
4. Legal Advisory Committee. Antici
pates moves by agitators and devises legal
means for handling any problem that
may arise. Provides legal council for all
members. Recommends application of
economic pressure to trouble makers.
An explanation of the Citizens
Councils, as made by Mrs. Sledge
stated:
Each council accepts the responsibility
of preventing integration of the races
within its immediate territory. Should a
consolidation of councils be necessary for
concerted action, a centralized control
could be established within a matter of
hours.
These organizations have as yet no
constitution and by-laws; no top-level
governing body, and no elected official
spokesman.
Council leadership is composed of the
most prominent, well-educated and con
servative business men in each commun
ity. These leaders are reliable men who
have been selected because of their
stability and good judgment. All members
are carefully screened by the membership
committee.
All segregation problems confronting
the respective councils are thoroughly
studied by appropriate committees, and
any actions recommended have the com
plete sanction of legal advisors who are
also members of the organization.
It is not the intent or purpose of the
Citizens’ Councils to be (or to be used
as) a political machine. In maintaining
segregation, all city, county and state
officials will receive complete support
from their councils Our congressmen
will receive like support.
All of Mississippi’s law enforcement of
ficers will be given any assistance they
request.
Agitation promoted or fomented by
out-of-state individuals and organizations
will be nullified.
Candidates for offices at all levels will
be carefully screened by the political
committees.
porting” legislation enacted at the
current session which quit work Sept.
24, was a bill by Rep. T. F. Badon of
Amite county (8,823 whites, 10,437
Negroes) adding a section to the
statute on conspiracy.
Two or more persons would be sub
ject to prosecution for conspiracy if
they conspired “to overthrow or
violate the segregation laws of this
state through force, violence, threats,
intimidation or otherwise.”
Upon conviction of the misde
meanor, the penalty would be a fine
of not less than $25 or from one month
to six months in jail, or both.
Three other “allied” measures were
defeated. They were:
1. To prohibit the fomenting and agita
tion of litigation, aimed at any person,
firm, corporation, group or organization
likely to encourage anti-segregation suits
in Mississippi. It was offered by Rep.
Byron Long of Lee county (27,578 whites,
10,655 Negroes). It proposed to make un
lawful by any of those named “either
before or after procedings commenced, to
promise, give or offer, or to conspire to
promise, give or offer, or for any person
to receive or conspire to receive, a valu
able consideration or any assistance
whatever as an inducement to such per
son to commence or further prosecute as
a party litigant, either individual, as next
friends or in any representative capacity,
other than as attorney at law, or solicitor
in equity, any proceedings in any court
or before any administrative agency in
the state of Mississippi.” The bill passed
the House but died in the Senate Judici
ary Comittee.
2. A companion measure by Rep. Long
to provide that before an out-of-date at
torney could practice before a state court
or state agency, he shall certify to the
State Board of Bar Admissions the details
of his case and present “evidence of his
good moral character and his good stand
ing in the state from which he comes
from some one of the judges of the courts
before which he has practiced and two
members of his local bar.” That bill was
aimed particularly at counsel for the
NAACP. It was defeated in the House
where it originated.
3. To require the registration of all fire
arms and records on all sales of ammuni
tion. Rep. Edwin White of Holmes county
(8,824 whites, 24,466 Negroes), was the
author and said it would safeguard "us
from those likely to cause us trouble.”
He commented on the floor of the House
as to the increased purchases of firearms
and ammunition by Negroes. He said
with the registration statute, law enforce
ment officers would know “in whose
hands” firearms and ammunition were in
and could confiscate them in case of
trouble. The bill passed the House but
died in the Senate Judiciary committee.
In another House and Senate-re
jected issue, the legislators refused
to petition the Congress under the
redress provision of the federal con
stitution citing seven specific griev
ances stemming from the Supreme
Court’s desegregation decision. Ask
ing for return of the constitutional
right of a state to govern itself, the
resolution by Rep. Billy Little of
Simpson County asserted that “we
the people of the South and the state
of Mississippi have been placed in a
great grievance because of the Unit
ed States Supreme Court’s decision
which declared that there could be
no separation of the races.”
Asking for the right to operate
Mississippi’s public schools without
federal interference, the resolution
which was adopted by the House but
died in the Senate Judiciary Com
mittee, set out the following griev
ances.
1. It (the Supreme Court decision) will
bring about grief, heartaches, and no
doubt, bloodshed and hatred between the
races, who have heretofore been of one
accord.
2. It leaves the road open for our foes
in enemy countries to capitalize upon our
differences.
3. It will bring about inevitably the
mixing of the blood of the two races,
the Caucasian and the Negro, and there
by destroy the heritage of both races.
4. It has engrossed upon our belief that
economically there can be equality of
the races, but in a different locale. The
decision has not destroyed our belief, but
has halted our attempts to this end.
5. The decision has cost the taxpayers
large sums of money in our efforts to
right the wrong and injustice which has
been perpetuated on our people.
6. It will tremendously affect the lives
of both races in every way.
7. It has impaired and hampered our
respect for racial separation as set up by
the Creator of the races. This is true in
the localities, principally in the South
where the Negro race predominates in
number.
When it became evident to Rep.
Little that the Senate would not con
sider his proposal, he reintroduced it
in the House as a House resolution
and it was adopted.
The resolution provides, however,
the grievances are not to be filed un
less the voters ratify the constitu
tional amendment in the Dec. 21 spe
cial election.