Newspaper Page Text
PAGE 10—July 6, 1955—SOUTHERN SCHOOL NEWS
Maryland Officials Willing To Move
Toward Compliance
BALTIMORE, Md.
r J'HE Supreme Court’s final action
in the school segregation cases
was immediately followed in Mary
land by statements from the gov
ernor, the president of the State
Board of Education, the State Su
perintendent of Schools and other
officials indicating the state’s willing
ness to take prompt steps toward
compliance. As the school boards in
Maryland’s 23 counties met during
June in regular monthly sessions,
most of them issued statements in
dicating a readiness at the local level
to move in the direction of deseg
regation.
Some integration by next fall is as
sured in one county and possibly in
at least two others. A fourth county
has announced that junior and senior
high schools will be put on a non-
segregated basis in September of
1956, and a fifth county has approved
the integration of athletic and other
extracurricular programs pending a
study of the larger problems of de
segregation. A Negro veteran was
admitted to a summer course at for
merly all-white Bethesda-Chevy
Chase high school, in Montgomery
County, marking the first public
school integration in Maryland out
side of Baltimore city.
The school board in the Eastern
Shore county of Worcester, with the
fourth highest percentage of colored
students in the state, became the first
to state flatly that it was not “feasi
ble or practical to attempt integra
tion of school children during the
1955-56 school year.” The Worcester
board voted to appoint a lay group
to help plan for desegregation “as
rapidly as may be feasible.”
RACE BAN NULLIFIES
Upon the request of State Supt.
of Schools Thomas G. Pullen, Jr., an
official ruling as to the effect on
Maryland of the Supreme Court’s de
cision was given on June 20 by Atty.
Gen. C. Ferdinand Sybert. Sybert, in
a ruling signed also by Deputy Atty.
Gen. Harrison L. Winter, said, in part:
“All constitutional and legislative
acts of Maryland requiring segrega
tion in the public schools in the State
of Maryland are unconstitutional,
and hence must be treated as nulli
ties.”
In direct response to the Attorney
General’s ruling, the State Board of
Education on June 22 unanimously
passed a resolution declaring that
“segregation is hereby abolished in
all of the state teachers colleges of
Maryland.” The state board also
called upon county school officials
to commence the transition from
segregation to integration in their
public schools “at the earliest prac
ticable date.” The board said “vol
untary compliance with deliberate
speed, without the necessity of court
compulsion, is advised on the part
of all local public school officials
throughout the state.”
GOOD FAITH REQUIRED
The Maryland branch of the Na
tional Association for the Advance-
‘Sound’ Strategy
The NAACP’s strategy adopted
at the Atlanta meeting this week
is sound.
All communities with segregated
schools should petition their local
school hoards to integrate the
schools at once.
Where the community shows
some disposition to get the inte
gration job done promptly and in
good faith there should he no court
action immediately.
But where there is evident delay,
buck-passing and alibis, then the
community should file a court pe
tition.
The law is now clear and definite.
From this time forward every
school, anywhere in the United
States, that is a segregated school
is being operated illegally.—Balti
more Afro-American.
ment of Colored People announced
through one of its attorneys, Robert
B. Watts, that it would sponsor pe
titions in every county calling upon
local school boards “to reorganize
the school systems under your juris
diction on a non-discriminatory ba
sis.” Watts was a Maryland repre
sentative at the Atlanta meeting of
the NAACP early in June and told
the Baltimore Sun upon his return
that suits would be filed next Sep
tember against any Maryland county
which fails to move “in good faith”
toward desegregation.
Watts’ statements to the press in
dicated that the local NAACP
acknowledges that desegregation will
take longer in some parts of Mary
land than in other parts and that
there may be sound administrative
reasons for postponing action in some
instances. Without defining “good
faith,” he said that it would be the
“key” to NAACP legal activities: “If
we do not find it, we will move fast.”
Watts added that his group “does not
expect too much difficulty” in Mary
land.
The Maryland General Assembly
concluded its 1955 “long” session (90
days) early in April without passing
any legislation pertaining to the
school segregation issue. Next year,
as in all even-numbered years, it will
hold a “short” (30 days) session, lim
ited to to the consideration of budg
etary matters and legislation of an
emergency nature. Local bills per
taining to such things as school affairs
in individual counties would be ruled
out at a short session, but otherwise
the General Assembly exercises a
considerable amount of latitude in
deciding what constitutes an “emer
gency” measure.
No school cases are currently be
fore the courts in Maryland. On June
17 Federal Judge Roszel C. Thomsen
heard the suit of the NAACP to end
segregation at public swimming pools
in Baltimore. Judge Thomsen de
cided that the swimmnig pool case
would have to await the Supreme
Court ruling on two local recreation
cases now before it, one involving
segregation at a city beach and the
other at a state beach.
In ruling that all Maryland laws
requiring school segregation must
henceforth be treated as nullities,
Atty. Gen. Sybert and Deputy Atty.
Gen. Winter took up the question
of whether or not Maryland was di
rectly bound by the Supreme Court
directive requiring a “prompt and
reasonable start toward full compli
ance with our May 17, 1954, ruling.”
Their written opinion said:
“It is true that this statement was
made with respect to five consolidated
cases in which neither the State of
Maryland nor administrative body or
officer thereof was a party, although
the state did participate in the argu
ment of the case as amicus curiae.
It might be argued that since the
State of Maryland was not techni
cally a party, the direction of the
Supreme Court is not yet applicable
to the State of Maryland, and that
such direction would not be applica
ble until such time as suit is filed
against the state or some educational
official and a final order making the
direction applicable entered in such
suit.
“This argument to our mind con
founds what is the clear state of the
law and the nature of the relief
which may be afforded in the event
that there is not full compliance with
the law. Obviously, in the event that
there is a refusal to comply with the
law, the mechanics of relief might
be different in the case of the State
of Maryland from that granted in
the case of one of the other states
which was a defendant in one of
the five consolidated cases in which
the Supreme Court acted. However,
the law with respect to public edu
cation as laid down by the Supreme
Court is crystal clear, and we do not
believe that differences in the me
chanics of obtaining relief can limit
in any sense the legal compulsion
NONE
GARRETT
267
. f
/“V
jtencKesbtr
•
CARROLL 1
k320 /
1,087^
Westminster J
N%/ 1
FREDERICK
•
Frederick.
\ 460 /
/ 5.1% \
9.1
'\~L033 S
' 3,8461
6.7%
1,324
4RFOK
. 10.5 %
v 483 6.1
CECIL
2,651
6.3%
MONTGOMERY
BALTIMORE
BA.LT/MOJte
'5,115'
851 KENT
r 29%/
73%,
The diversity of the desegregation problem in
Maryland is shown by this map, which gives the
number of Negro school children in each county and
what per cent they represent of the total county
school population. The figures were compiled by the
Maryland Department of Education on the basis of
last fall’s enrollment. In Baltimore city schools, de
segregated last fall, there were 57,064 colored pupils
in a school population of 143,688, or just under 40
per cent.
.6,236'
892' 1
tVASM NtSTOH
GEORGES/
13.5%
; 1,674
50.1%
445.3 % /
DORCHESTER
1,281
ST. MARYS 1
-30.2,
'1,987 25.1%
OCOMICO
l woRcesn*^
'’SOMERSET ) 1,757
’1,610^8^
40.2 %>
presently existing on the appropriate
school authorities of the State of
Maryland to make ‘a prompt and rea
sonable start’ toward the ultimate
elimination of racial discrimination
in public education.”
The action of the State Board of
Education in ending segregation at
teachers colleges affects five state in
stitutions with a combined enroll
ment of about 2,600 students. Three
of the schools were formerly desig
nated as white and two as Negro.
Summer classes were in session prior
to the change of policy, so no mixing
is expected until fall. Not much mix
ing is expected then, since the
schools are too overcrowded to per
mit large numbers of new students.
No plans for mixed faculties have
been made.
The desegregation of the teachers
colleges completes the dropping of
color bars at public institutions of
higher learning. The University of
Maryland announced in June of 1954
that its undergraduate schools would
thereafter be open to qualified Negro
residents of the state. Its graduate
schools had been opened to Negroes
prior to that time. Morgan State Col
lege, primarily the Negro center of
higher education has had a few white
students, the first of whom was grad
uated this June.
The summer workshop for teachers
run by the State Department of Edu
cation was put on an integrated basis
this year. The statewide principals’
meeting was also racially mixed.
The Eastern Shore of Maryland is
considered to be one of the regions
of the state where integration will
be slow in coming because the
proportion of Negroes is relatively
high; the white residents, by tradi
tion, are independent, set in their
ways and imbued with deep south
ern racial attitudes, and the area
is linked geographically, economical
ly and socially with Southern Dela
ware, where opposition to desegre
gation has been intense during the
past year. Yet the ’Shore gives every
outward appearance so far of mov
ing toward compliance with the Su
preme Court decision.
In the eight counties of the ’Shore
proper, the percentage of Negro chil
dren in the total school population
ranges from 23 to more than 40 per
cent. Most of the county school
boards or county superintendents
have made some sort of statement
of intentions since the May 31 ruling.
In Kent County, with 29 per cent
Negro school children as of last fall,
the board of education has declared
that “every effort will be made to
formulate a feasible program of de
segregation and to carry it out in an
orderly manner.” The board has
named a “lay advisory committee”
to help with its “deliberations and
formation of policies,” and has sub
mitted a list of legal and administra
tive questions to the Attorney Gen
eral and the State Board of Edu
cation.
BOARD POLICY EXPECTED
In Queen Anne’s County, with 28.1
per cent Negro school children, the
school board had met with the Kent
board prior to May 31 to discuss mu
tual problems of desegregation. After
the court action the school board
president, Glenn T. James, an
nounced that the board had talked
over a general outline of proposed
action and expected to set a definite
policy by mid-July . The county
school superintendent, Harry C.
Rhodes, explained that they had a
“rough plan” at present and wanted
to discuss it with two groups of white
citizens who formerly had served
the school in an advisory capacity
and also with a Negro group. Rhodes
added that an integration group
would be named, consisting of
representatives of the three groups,
and that “the integration committee
will probably remain as an advisory
group as long as there is the prob
lem.”
In Talbot County, with about 32
per cent Negroes in the schools, the
school board has decided to appoint
a racially mixed citizens group to
help work out an integration plan
and has expressed the hope that
problems can be solved quickly.
In Caroline County, with 22.5 per
cent of its school children colored,
the school board has discussed de
segregation but made no public pro
nouncements. The county school
headquarters at Denton is within 25
miles of Milford, Del., where in
tegration was tried and then aban
doned last fall. In mid-June a bond
proposal for a consolidated high
school was defeated by close to a
3-to-l vote in a special election. It
was reported from the county that
part of the opposition to the $1,600,-
000 bond issue was based on white
fears that consolidation would lead
to more integration, but racial ob
jections were not raised in public.
The county school superintendent,
W. Stewart Fitzgerald, has said that
he feels “if we act in accordance
with the law we shall not have too
much trouble in Caroline County.”
NON-DISCRIMINATION PLEDGED
In Dorchester County, with with
32/68 ratio of Negro to white chil
dren, the school board met and voted
to form an advisory group to study
the desegregation question.
In Wicomico, where Negro chil
dren represent 25.1 per cent of the
school population, the school board
has said that it will uphold the . law
of the land but wishes to proceed
with caution. The board, following
its June meeting, said that its atti
tude is: “A guarantee to all . . . of
the right not to be discriminated
against . . . not to be denied equality
before the law.”
Worcester County, at the Virginia
end of the Shore and with more
than a third of its school population
Negro, was the first in Maryland to
declare that it was not “feasible or
practical to attempt any integration
of school children during the 1955-
’56 school year.” The school board
came to this conclusion in view of
“the lateness of the final decision of
the court” and the “many conditions
which complicate the problem in
Worcester County; viz, the large pro
portion of colored children, the in
adequacy of school facilities, etc.” The
Worcester school board voted to ap
point a citizens advisory committee
to study desegregation and said
that “every effort will be made to
plan an orderly program for desegre
gation to be carried out as rapidly ;
as may be feasible.”
In Somerset County, with the third j
highest proportion of Negro school
children in the state—40.2 per cent-
the school board took no action on
desegregation in June because of an
already crowded agenda. The school j
board in July 1954 put itself on rec
ord as willing to be guided by the
Supreme Court’s “recommendations
for implementation of its May 17 de
cision” and also endorsed the posi
tion of the State Board of Education
which said that Maryland would
comply “seemingly and in order."
NORTHERN MARYLAND
Cecil County swings around the
head of Chesapeake Bay from the
Eastern Shore to what geographically
is northern Maryland. (Actually
Marylanders do not use the term.
They speak of the Eastern Shore,
Western Shore, Southern Maryland
and Western Maryland.) Cecil has
only 483 colored school children, one
of the smallest numbers in the state,
and they represent just over 6 per
cent of the school population. The
Cecil board has not taken formal ac
tion on segregation, but the county
superintendent of schools, Morris W.
Rannels, announced in a county
weekly newspaper that an attempt
to eliminate housing of school chil
dren on a racial basis would be made
this fall. |
Harford County, below Cecil, has
slightly more than 1,300 Negro pupib'
representing 10.5 per cent of the to- ,
tal school population. The Harfo r
school board did not have a regular
meeting scheduled until July, 3
which time, according to a coun.
weekly, “there is a prevailing bene
that a citizens’ committee will ]
named to consider the situation
all angles and submit recommend 3 '
tions.” _
Below Harford comes Baitin'®
County, which is a political sub* ,
vision completely apart from Bal ^ ,
more city (the city is, in a sense,
county in itself, but with far 1110
autonomy than most counties). Bal ,
more County since the war has b j
‘bustin’ out all over” with white su g ,
urban developments and has ha " ,
slight decrease in colored s c
population as Negro families ha .
moved to the city. As of last 3 {
Baltimore County had a 6.7 pe f c
colored school enrollment. t
TIME REQUIRED \
The Baltimore County school h 0 ^
passed a resolution on June 23 ^ •
cepting the Supreme Court
and referring administrative d®'
to the school staff for immediate c t
sideration. The county superin ®
ent of schools, Edward G. Stap e j g t
told the board that it was ‘ P 0 ?^. :
that we can work out a P art jf„ j,ut J
plementation plan for 1955-56. :
he indicated that the administr ■
problems involved in desegreg 3 ^ -
a school system already jamp 3 ^
with children, with more co ^
daily into the county, were sue 0^
a proper integration program
(Continued on Next Page)