Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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)