Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

VOL. 2, NO. 10 NASHVILLE, TENN. $2 PER YEAR Resistance Grows; 36 Areas to Integrate Manifesto Protests Court Act WASHINGTON, D.C. manifesto denouncing the Su preme Court’s school desegrega tion decision was signed by 101 Southern congressmen and intro duced in the House and Senate on March 12. The “Declaration of Constitutional . Principles” bore the names of 19 senators and 82 representatives from 11 states. The document has no legal standing in Congress and requires no congressional action. Heart of the manifesto was con tained in these two paragraphs: “We decry the Supreme Court’s encroachments on rights reserved to the states and to the people, con trary to established law, and to the Constitution. “We commend the motives of those states which have declared the in tention to resist forced integration by any lawful means.” MET WITH GEORGE The manifesto was the idea of a group of southern Democratic sen ators who early last month met in the office of Sen. Walter F. George of Georgia to outline their position on segregation. George was appointed chairman of a committee charged with pre paring a formal statement on the senators’ views and intentions. Asked to write drafts were Richard B. Russell of Georgia, Samuel J. Ervin of North Carolina and John C. Stennis of Mississippi. Later, these drafts were written into one document by Russell and Strom Thurmond of South Carolina. Then began a back-stage fight for signatures. Two conservatives, Sen ators Spessard Holland of Florida 1 and Price Daniel of Texas, said the language of the manifesto was too inflammatory for them. As a result the statement was toned down and < more moderate words substituted. A leader in the drive for recruits w as Sen. Harry Byrd of Virginia, who some say concocted the whole 1 idea of the manifesto. Moderate southerners, it is said, were put on the spot. They felt refusal to sign would put them on the side of the i National Association for the Ad vancement of Colored People, at least in the minds of the voters back home. ' TWO REFUSE Two senators refused flatly to sign. y*ey were Albert Gore and Estes Kefauver of Tennessee, the latter 1 an avowed candidate for the Demo- cr atic nomination for President Kefauver said he would .not sign because the “Supreme Court must • be the filial authority on constitu- I uonal questiofis” and “its decision n °w i s the law of the land and must I i i ' SSN Receives Russwurm Award Southern School News is one of the 10 recipients of the 1956 Russwurm Award from the Na- wnal Newspaper Publishers As sociation. The citation was made “in rec ognition of outstanding achieve- nient in making possible a richer opnception of democratic prin- p'Ples, and in tribute for uphold- those highest traditions Considered as the ideals of the Ami encan Way of Life.” ‘Now Can We Sit Down and Discuss the Problem?’ —Greensboro (N.C.) Daily News be followed.” He said “chaos and confusion” would result if a “large segment” of the population fails to abide by its decision. Senate Democratic leader Lyndon B. Johnson of Texas was not asked to sign the manifesto. He said he un derstood the congressmen by-passed him because they did not want to appear to be trying to dictate Dem ocratic or Senate policy. House Speaker Sam Rayburn, from Texas, also was purposely ignored. On the House side of Capitol Hill, 24 southern representatives refused to lend their names to the manifesto. One of the strongest statements was made by Rep. Thurmond Chatham (D-N.C.), who said: “I, personally, will not sign any thing that will tear down the power and prestige of the court as the final arbiter of justice. We sometimes for get that, in a country ruled by a dictator, the courts are destroyed first.” Rep. Harold D. Cooley, also of North Carolina, refused to sign the manifesto which he viewed as “a dangerous document calculated to aggravate the situation.” COOLEY CRITICAL Cooley said the manifesto “holds out false hope” that legal means are available for upsetting the Supreme Court’s ban. He added: “I am and always have been definitely and posi tively in favor of our present system of segregated schools.” Seven state delegations had 100 per cent participation in signing. They were Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Virginia. There were no signers from Kentucky or Oklahoma and 16 members of the large Texas delegation in the House withheld their names. The manifesto was submitted in the Senate by George and in the House by Howard W. Smith (D-Va.). There was no comment following House presentation. This was not the case in the Senate. Sen. Wayne Morse, Oregon Dem ocrat, declared one would have thought that “today Calhoun was walking and speaking on the floor of the Senate.” He added: “A historic debate is due . . . because Congress will have to decide whether or not we are go ing to follow the Supreme Court decision, recognizing the supremacy of the court in protecting the Amer ican people in their constitutional rights.” BAR FORCE The signers of the manifesto pledged themselves to back all law ful means to reverse the court de cision and “to prevent the use of force” in carrying it out. The signers said the court’s “clear abuse of ju dicial power” has fanned fires of “hatred and suspicion” in Dixie. Prompting Sober Thought —Nashville (Tenn.) Banner Northern senators’ reaction to the manifesto at first was shock. Later, some expressed relief that the south erners had not been more violent in their stand. What some of the signers failed to get in the manifesto, they expressed later. Sen. Byrd said the document was “part of the plan of massive re sistance we’ve been working on and I hope and believe it will be an ef fective action.” Sen. Thurmond said: “It would be submission to cowardice if we failed to use every lawful means to pro tect the rights of the people. We are free morally and legally to oppose the [Supreme Court] decision. We must fight it to the end.” Kefauver, on the other hand, warned “you can’t secede from the Supreme Court.” Adlai Stevenson, the other an nounced Democratic hopeful for the Presidential nomination, said from Chicago he disagreed with the mani festo, declaring he did not believe the Supreme Court exceeded its “proper authority” in the school case. He said the nation “must pro ceed along the course” charted by the court. “It is very important to recognize that these southern leaders . . . have committed themselves to support their views by legal processes only,” he commented. EISENHOWER COMMENT In a similar reaction, President Eisenhower during a press confer ence said of the manifesto: “Now, the first thing about the manifesto is this: that they say they are going to use every legal means.” Veteran newsmen commented on Mr. Eisen hower’s earnestness when he dis cussed the manifesto. The President spoke out against extreme actions in the bitter school desegregation problem and pleaded for moderation on both sides: He made these points: • Southerners need time to ad just their thinking and progress to the Supreme Court’s desegregation decision because it was a complete reversal to previous decisions. • The Supreme Court itself ac knowledged compliance must be gradual. The President said he did not know how long it would take. • The nation should remember that progress already has been made in many border states and some southern states. He is relying on the “good sense, the common sense” of the people to bring about gradual integration. © As quickly as possible an inves tigative commission should be au thorized by Congress, as requested in the President’s State of the Union message, to look into the desegre gation problem and the entire field of racial rights. (See DIST. OF COLUMBIA, Page 2) continued hardening of opposition toward the U.S. Supreme Court’s de- *■ cisions against school segregation was apparent during March in the Deep South, with strong pro-segregation sentiments expressed for the first time at the highest official levels in Arkansas and Florida. Meanwhile, 36 school districts in four border states—Maryland, Oklahoma, Kentucky and Texas—disclosed plans the court decisions. The 17 southern and border states were still in a period of litigation and legislation—and resolution. During the month 101 senators and congress men from 11 states took the spotlight with a “southern manifesto” criticiz ing the Supreme Court, and this had wide political repercussions. • On the legislative side, at least 42 pro-segregation measures have been adopted in the first three months of 1956 by legislatures of five states— Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina and Virginia. These included resolutions of interposition, which are being considered also in Texas and Arkansas. On the legal front the U.S. Supreme Court returned two significant deci sions: one, in a case involving three Negro undergraduates at the Univer sity of North Carolina, affirmed the application of the 1954 Brown case to all tax-supported colleges; the other ordered immediate admission of a Negro applicant to the University of Florida law school. Additionally, there were petitions filed or court actions taken in Louisi ana, Maryland, North Carolina, Ten nessee, Texas and West Virginia. In the first state test case of its kind a North Carolina court upheld the piv otal 1955 pupil assignment law. • Activity by pro-segregation and pro-integration groups also quick ened during the month. As an after- math of the Autherine Lucy case Alabama, for example, reported greatly increased membership in the Citizens Councils of that state. Mem phis formed an inter-racial commit tee which took no stand on segrega tion-desegregation but which sought to improve community group rela tionships. The school districts announcing de segregation plans or study commis sion plans recommending desegrega tion included 11 in Kentucky, 10 in Oklahoma, 11 in Texas and four in Maryland. A state-by-state summary of ma jor developments follows: Alabama An upsurge of Citizens Council ac tivity, with increased membership and meetings almost nightly, fol lowed the Autherine Lucy case and the expulsion of Leonard Wilson, a leader in the February student dem onstrations at Tuscaloosa, from the University of Alabama. The legisla ture, meeting in the fifth special ses sion in 14 months, acted on a heavy volume of pro-segregation legisla tion, adopting five major measures. Arkansas The state administration of Gov. Orval Faubus appeared to be moving to the segregation side with endorse ment of plans for a resolution of in terposition and a pupil assignment system. Delaware The State Board of Education, which has a long-standing pro-inte gration policy, refused to order eight school districts (mostly in south Delaware) to desegregate their schools immediately. District of Columbia One of three District commission ers has proposed mass demotion of school children who show achieve ment lags, saying “unmanageable” achievement problems existed prin cipally in former Negro schools since 1949 and are no better under inte gration. of varying degree for compliance with Florida The state administration appeared to be moving from gradual accep tance of integration to all-out re sistance following a U. S. Supreme Court order for immediate admission of a Negro to the University of Flor ida law school in a seven-year-old suit. Georgia A veteran Georgia educator, Dr Guy H. Wells, president emeritus of Georgia State College for Women, was stripped of his title because of alleged pro-integration statements. Six Negroes sought unsuccessfully to enter Georgia State College of Business Administration in Atlanta. In a busy session, the legislature adopted 10 major pieces of pro-seg regation legislation. Kentucky Eleven more school districts an nounced desegregation plans during March with programs ranging from first grade only or high school only to all grades. Louisiana Efforts to dissolve the National As sociation for the Advancement of Colored People in Louisiana followed a February court decision invalidat ing all state segregation laws. Mean while, two new school entrance suits were filed in the state, and there was renewed Citizens Council activity. Maryland Three county advisory groups have recommended desegregation of their schools this fall and a date has been set in a fourth county for Negroes to make applications for transfer to all- white schools. Mississippi A new State Sovereignty Commis sion of 12 members was set up to guard against racial integration. The commission implements the Missis sippi resolution of interposition adopted by the 1956 legislature along with eight major pro-segregation bills. Missouri Quick action by school authorities, community leaders and police avert ed a strike at a Kansas City high school. Race was considered a minor matter in the threatened disturbance at the school, desegregated last year. North Carolina A state superior court ruling up held the 1955 pupil assignment law, saying it applied to individuals rath er than groups. The decision—first state test of the new law—has been appealed. In a decision upholding a federal circuit court, the U. S. Su- (See RESISTANCE, Page 2) Index State Page Alabama 5 Arkansas 8 Delaware 6 District of Columbia 1 and 2 Florida 9 Georgia 1 Kentucky 16 Louisiana 14 Maryland 6 Mississippi 10 Missouri 8 North Carolina 11 Oklahoma 15 South Carolina 12 Tennessee 4 Texas 3 Virginia 13 West Virginia 14