Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

Delaware WILMINGTON, Del. ELAWARE’S attorney general, H. Albert Young, one of the chief targets of attack by the National As sociation for the Advancement of White People, has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to permit a gradual adjustment from segregated public education to a system “without race distinction” through the local courts, either the U.S. District Court or, as in the case of Delaware, its Court of Chancery. However, Mr. Young makes it clear that he thinks the U.S. Supreme Court “out of the bounty of its wis dom should fix an ultimate date be yond which there will be no further postponement of relief under the de cision of May 17—a date which will afford the states an opportunity to plan, educate and promote commun ity acceptance and orderly physical fruition of desegregation.” In the conclusion of his brief, Mr. Young states: The mandate of this (U. S. Supreme) Court should include instructions to the lower courts that, in granting or deferring immediate relief, they shall exercise equitable discretion according to local conditions, provided that a constructive transitional program is shown to be in progress and subject to the limitation that ultimate relief by way of admission on a non-segregated basis shall be effected no later than a date which this Court should fix. Mr. Young also asks that “in the light of the decision of this Court of May 17, and the successful integra tion of (Delaware) respondents into the Claymont and Hockessin schools, the two Delaware cases should be af firmed.” Mr. Young had prepared to appear personally before the U.S. Supreme Court the week of Dec. 6, along with his successor, J. Donald Craven of Wilmington, who was elected attor ney general on Nov. 2. Now that the hearings have been postponed until 1955, Craven, who takes office on Jan. 2, will represent Delaware. It is not known whether Craven will ask Young to continue as a special deputy attorney general. 6. A previous decision of the Dela ware Supreme Court makes admis sion mandatory where separate facil ities are not equal. 7. Since many instances of unequal facilities may be presented to the courts for immediate relief under the “separate but equal” doctrine, grad ual integration depends upon the time element to be provided for in the U.S. Supreme Court’s mandate dur ing this period of transition. 8. The mandate of the U.S. Su preme Court should make it clear that, notwithstanding inequality of facilities, the local courts shall in the exercise of their equity powers, be permitted to grant such relief as they deem proper after consideration of the physical, economic, and social conditions of the community and upon a showing of a bona fide effort directed toward orderly desegrega tion. QUOTES FROM BRIEF Here are some of the pertinent quotes from Young’s brief, indicating the extent to which the Delaware at torney general combines legal think ing with a socio-legal philosophy: By the decision of May 17, 1954, this Court has invalidated almost a century of social tradition which has been per petuated under apparent constitutional sanction for two generations. Social thinking, public mores and school ex penditures have been founded upon the time-accepted doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ public education. The factual review in this brief dem onstrates the somber extent to which the doctrine of segregation in public educa tion saturates the thinking of the citizens of some of our states. This Court has eradicated the constitutional sanction of this tradition. A transition is required which only time can effectuate. Shock is not the medium by which this transition can be accom plished. Factors which weighed in favor of im mediate relief under the ‘separate but equal’ cases are overweighed by problems of social acceptance and social, economic and facility readjustment growing out of the decision of May 17. At least in some areas, there must be a twilight era when personal rights must give way to community problems and ATTY. GEN. YOUNG He Prepared Brief general public welfare. This Court should remand the cases to the lower courts for formulation of decrees for the admittance of plaintiffs to the public schools without regard to race, as soon as practicable within a time limit to be set by the U. S. Supreme Court. Immediate desegregation resulting in an uneventful transition in one locality would result in strong community up heaval in another locality. Hence, there is no standard formula, no elixir by which the transition can be uniformly effected. The transition can be moulded only through wisdom based upon a knowledge of the facts and circumstances and psy chology of the community affected. These facts can best be obtained and the transi tion can be most smoothly effectuated by the courts in which these cases arose. The U. S. Supreme Court does not have before it, nor should it undertake, the Herculean task of outlawing the existing system of public education, nor of cre ating a substitute. The U. S. Supreme Court has before it the rights of individ ual children. Those rights can best be brought to fruition at the local level by the courts of first instance. The mandate or decree of the U. S. Supreme Court should be the beacon light by which the further action of the lower courts can be guided. Relief should be deferred by the local courts only after thorough consideration is given to numerous factors such as the history of race relations in the communi ty affected, the extent of migration to and from the community, the extent of social and economic segregation within SOUTHERN SCHOOL ATTY. GEN.-ELECT CRAVEN He Will Argue Case the community, the permanency of the population, and the condition and ca pacity of existing school facilities. The U. S. Supreme Court must be con vinced that those charged with the re sponsibility of effecting total integration are taking constructive steps toward the elimination of the segregation barrier and that those steps are being bonafidely carried out as expeditiously as it is pos sible. However, Young does not attempt to suggest “an ultimate date” of in tegration. He points out in his brief that deferral dates of relief have va ried in other U.S. Supreme Court cases from six months in one instance to a span of nine years in another. PUBLIC OPINION POLLS Meanwhile, a number of public opinion polls, sponsored by “citizens committees” were held throughout Delaware’s southernmost county, Sussex. Even before the referenca were held, there was no doubt as to the outcome. It was taken for granted that the vote would be overwhelm ingly in favor of retaining segrega tion in the public schools of the com munities. The questions in the referenda were very simple and to the point: “Do you favor segregation?” “Do you favor integration?” However, in one Delaware PTA Procedure Outlined OPPOSING VIEWPOINT In contrast to the gradualism but ultimate fixed date plea of Atty. Gen. Young, Louis L. Redding, attorney for the Delaware branch of the NAA CP, asks that the ultimate date be fixed at September 1955. The early part of Young’s brief on the mandate of the U.S. Supreme Court gives a quick survey of the or ganization of the Delaware school system and how it is financed. He points out that integration will bring with it numerous financial problems, particularly involving bonded indebt edness of school districts. He also points out that there are some Negro school districts separate from white school districts and other Negro school districts whose geo graphical boundaries overlap those of white districts. He also runs through the “progress” story of partial integration in some °f the school districts of the state. He touches on what has come to be known as “the Milford story” and the impact of the National Association tor the Advancement of White Peo ple upon the attempt of partial inte gration in southern Delaware. STATE summary . J ^ I1 d he summarizes the Delaware f'tPation—as of the middle of Novem ber as follows: L Partial desegregation has pro- Sre^ed satisfactorily in all but one ? the districts where it was under taken. ^'■ frt certain areas in Delaware, a gradual transition from a segregated ool system is necessary to insure agency and community accept- Wa opinion in lower Dela- re has been aroused against de legation. - ' f*- significant percentage of the Pie in parts of Delaware are not 5 Tb° accept integration. g^‘ v) e immediate admission of Ne- the u'.? r6n 1° white schools under is in 0l< * " se P ara te but equal” doctrine fr cons istent with orderly transition jjj separate to integrated schools m^ eas . where such immediate ad- ulat . 10n fr opposed by the local pop- (Note: James H. Snowden, a resident of Wilmington, Del., is president of the Delaware Congress of Parents & Teach ers, which represents some 25,000 mem bers throughout Delaware. The Delaware Congress, made up of representatives from all local PTA units in the state, has no color line. (Because Parent-Teacher organizations have such a vital interest interest in the segregation-desegregation issue, Mr. Snowden’s memorandum sent out to all PTA units in Delaware is reprinted here to show what the PTA organization in one state affected by the Supreme Court rul ing is doing.) “The decision of the U. S. Supreme Court must be the basis for the action of the PTA in the process of integra tion. This bald statement is made be cause there is no other course which would permit us to remain faithful to our objective as an organiation dedicated to the education of children and youth. “U. S. Sen. John J. Williams very aptly summed up this situation by pointing out that the court’s decision could only be changed by amending the Constitution, or by overthrowing the government. Even should an amendment to the Constitution be proposed and submitted to the states for ratification, the decision of the court must be respected until the amendment was finally approved. The second method is met only by scorn by any responsible citizen. “Therefore, the Delaware Congress has no choice as to the course it will follow. We will respect the decision of the Court, and those who have reservations as to the wisdom of the Court’s opinion must fervently hope that time will show such reservations were unnecessary. “Founding our action on the Court’s decision of principle, the next step is to apply the principle and to continue, without interruption or hesitation, the programs of education we want for our children. The officers of the Delaware Congress of Parents and Teachers submit the following as a practical approach to integration; an approach to be evaluated and adapted by local units to the parti- MR. SNOWDEN cular needs of their communities. “Step 1. Volunteer or request rep resentation on community commit tees studying integration by appoint ment of local boards of education. The formation of citizen advisory committees is the first action which your Congress officers believes es sential to an orderly process of in tegration, and we have urged, when ever possible, that school districts in stitute such committees to study the community desires in the initial pro gram of integration. Certainly the PTA, one of the leading lay organiza tions in the field of education, should be represented on such groups. “Step 2. When the local board of education in your district has an nounced its policy on integration, give it widespread publicity. This is the second action which your Con gress officers have urged whenever they have had the opportunity. The school community is all the people in the district, not just the people who ordinarly express an interest in the schools, and one service the PTA can render is that of being a means of communication. A successful in tegration program is one which goes into effect with all the people aware of when it begins, how it works, and who is involved. Broadcasting this information would be a community service and fully within the sphere of PTA activity. “Step 3. Insist on firm adherence to the policy by all people in the dis trict. A set of rules is not a set of rules if it works for one person, but not for another; that kind of inter pretation will only lead to difficulties. The Congress officers have advocated enforcement as a third action for the process of de-segregation. Local PTA units are not policemen for the en forcement of school policy, but the members should be the first to res pect such rules and to demonstrate their confidence in their school board and school officials. “Step 4. Discuss this new principle in a meeting, or a series of meetings. You are not concerned with the question of whether the Court’s de cision is right or wrong; you are con cerned only with how you, the people of a certain school or a certain dis trict, can put the principle into effect without deterring the educational progress of your children. You will be told that discussion of integration is undesirable because it may pro voke more heat than light. You may find that your administrators or school personnel are timorous of the subject. You may be told that it is better just to let integration come without advance discussion—but the evidence so far would indicate that all of these objections are themselves dangerous. The time to resolve com munity attitude, the time for condi tioning, is not when integration takes place—when students, teachers, and parents of two races are brought to gether with little previous oppor- tunitv for guidance or mutual under standing — but before integration, when time will permit each individ- (See DELAWARE PTA on Page 15) NEWS —Dec. I, 1954—PAGE 3 instance—in the town of Laurel—the voters were also asked to say whether or not they favored an addition to the Negro school. By a great majority they expressed themselves as in fa vor of segregation and in favor of expanding the Negro school. Referenda were also held in the fol lowing towns of Sussex County: Mil ford, Georgetown, Harrington, Greenwood, and Milton. The exact purpose of these refer enda has not yet been officially dis closed by the “citizens’ committee” but it is presumed they are intended to have the following importance: 1. To show the General Assembly which convenes next year how the people feel about integration. 2. To lay the groundwork for sup port of an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to permit separate but equal schools to exist. 3. To crystallize public opinion against integration of any kind in the public schools. VOTING RULES VARIED Few Negroes participated in the referenda and the rules for voting varied according to communities. In most of the communities only regis tered voters were permitted to par ticipate. In Laurel, the rule followed that of any school referendum—any recognized resident of the district could vote. However, in the town of Green wood, Negroes were not permitted to take part in the referendum. The people of Milton, after their referendum which showed 934 against integration and six in favor, drew up a petition which was sent to Gov. J. Caleb Boggs. The petition, signed by almost 800 persons, asked the governor to use his influence to have Delaware rep resented by an “impartial” attorney before the U.S. Supreme Court at the mandate hearing, rather than Atty. Gen. H. Albert Young. The petition charged that Mr. Young has been partial to integration and is biased. The governor took no action on the petition of Milton, other than to ac knowledge its receipt. Anyway, it is pointed out by lawyers that the gov ernor could not bar the attorney gen eral from reDresenting the state of Delaware before the U.S. Supreme Court because in Delaware the attor ney general is an elected constitu tional officer. ELECTION REACTION The controversy in Sussex County became a factor in the election in Del aware on Nov. 2. Ordinarily—at least in recent times—off-year elections in Delaware are taken by the Republi cans. But this time, the Republicans were given a smashing defeat, and practically all political experts and political writers in Delaware say that the segregation question was a factor in the Republican loss. The segregationists blamed the Re publicans and the Republican gov ernor, J. Caleb Boggs, for what in roads integration has made in Dela ware. The integrationists in northern Del aware blamed the Boggs administra tion for not having taken a firmer stand against Bryant Bowles and the NAAWP. U.S. Sen. John J. Williams (Re publican and not running for re-elec tion) tried to persuade the public that integration was not a political issue but obviously it was, especially in southern Delaware. The Democrats of Delaware have taken full control of the General As sembly and practically all county of fices in each of the three counties of the state. A Democratic U.S. senator and U.S. representative and attorney general were elected. There is some speculation now about what the Democratic Party of Delaware—with a more than com fortable majority in the General As sembly of 1955—will do with its va rious civil rights platform pledges, ranging from FEPC to support of the U.S. Supreme Court integration de cision. These pledges were made in the Democratic state convention in August of 1954 before any one had any idea of what was going to happen in September and October. Political writers in Delaware point out that when it comes to civil rights issues in the General Assembly of the state, decisions and points-of- view cut across party lines and de pend more upon residence of legisla tors than political party affiliations.