Newspaper Page Text
W
SOUTHERN SCHOOL NEWS—MAY 1957—PAGE II
Texas Legislators Push
Pro-Segregation Bills
AUSTIN, Texas
ills to delay integration in
public schools advanced in the
Texas legislature, but were threat
ened with a Senate filibuster. (See
"Legislative Action.”)
Ralph Yarborough, a liberal
Democrat, was elected to the U.S.
Senate from Texas. (See “Politi
cal Activity.”)
Wichita F alls Independent
School District lost its appeal to
the U. S. Supreme Court in a case
involving integration. (See “Legal
Action.”)
The Houston school board, beset by
administrative troubles, ordered a spe
cial meeting for May 6 to receive a
report from its study committee on
compliance with the Supreme Court’s
segregation decisions. (See “School
Boards and Schoolmen.”!
•MODERATES’ WIN
At Beaumont, incumbent school board
members described as moderates won
over avowed pro-segregationists. (See
“School Boards and Schoolmen.”)
A majority of students at Texas
Christian University voted to continue
segregation, in a campus poll. (See “In
the Colleges.”)
Creation of a statewide commission
to recommend an integration plan was
advocated by a well-known Texas edu
cator. (See “What They Say.”)
The Texas House of Representatives
passed eight bills aimed at preserving
segregation. Five of these received
favorable reports from a Senate com
mittee, and the others were expected to
receive similar treatment.
Whether the bills are finally passed at
this session of the legislature remains to
be seen. May 7 is the 120th day of the
session, and its scheduled adjournment
date, although members may continue
working indefinitely without pay. They
are expected to remain several days
overtime.
Sen. Henry Gonzalez of San Antonio,
where schools have integrated, said he
intended to filibuster against the bills
if the good Lord illuminates me with
me intelligence.” Sen. Abraham Kazen
of Laredo also promised to “do every
thing I can” to stop them. In a 21-mem-
oer committee, however, Kazen alone
asked to be recorded against the five
ills which were approved by voice
vote.
Ackers see support
There are 31 members in the Texas
en ate, and backers of the bills claim
su PPort of 23 or more for their main
bills. A two-thirds majority (21 sena
tors) will be needed to get the bills up
for debate before the legislature closes.
A move was scheduled to bring the
bills up on May 1.
The Senate Committee on State Af
fairs voted 11 to 6 against seeking an
attorney general’s opinion on constitu
tionality of House Bill 32 by Rep. Rea
gan R. Huffman of Marshall. It would
forbid any state or local government,
including schools, from employing a
member of the National Association for
the Advancement of Colored People.
The state of Texas is seeking to pre
vent the NAACP from operating here
in the future. (See “Legal Action.”)
Huffman called the NAACP a
trouble-maker. Opponents defended it
as a protector of civil rights.
GET FAVORABLE REPORTS
Reported favorably by the Senate
committee, besides HB 32, were the fol
lowing bills:
HB 231, a pupil assignment proposal.
HB 232, prohibits compulsory attend
ance in an integrated school.
HB 233, requires local boards to
designate schools as “white,” “Negro”
or “integrated” for assignment purposes
and provides machinery for dissatisfied
patrons to appeal to a state legislative
committee.
HB 65, prohibits future integration
without approval of a majority of voters
in a school district election. More than
100 districts already integrated would
remain that way, unless segregated
again by election.
Fifteen persons—ministers, Negro
organization officers, labor union and
political group spokesmen — appeared
against the bills in the Senate commit
tee.
SEES ‘STAMPEDE’
The Rev. Christian H. Kehl, San
Antonio Episcopal rector, said the reac
tion to pro-segregation laws would
“stampede the whole state into integra
tion or confusion.”
Hall E. Timanus of Houston explained
the bills, most of which stemmed from
a Statewide Advisory Committee on
Segregation named by former Gov.
Allan Shivers. Timanus headed its legal
committee. He termed the pupil assign
ment act the most important in the
series. It is similar to the North Caro
lina act which has so far stood up in
court, said Timanus.
Other proposals passed by the House:
HB 235, authorizes payment of tuition
for students to attend accredited non
sectarian private schools when no seg
regated public school is available in the
district.
MUST DEFEND SUITS
HB 236, directs the attorney general
to defend suits against the state and
school districts involving segregation.
HB 239, requires registration and
reports to the state by persons and
organizations whose main activity is to
Oklahoma
(Continued From Page 10)
against the defendants on whi
,f le ' could be based, have admitted ;
., e ^legations of fact well pleaded
re 6 Pontiffs.” Thus, he states, the
mams no genuine nor material issu
act to be decided by the court.
^’JUNCTION SAID UNNECESSAR'
Rod 3 t ^ r< ^ integration suit (Bailey
v in which the parents of a 1
Oklahoma City Negro de
Qu, e . are seeking her admission to t]
Phii ° ma Btdlocd for the Deaf at Su
r - the state attorney general’s oflfi
filed
an answer declaring the permane
htiu . wel aeciar:
Mr nct j 0n requested is not necessa
ask JmT M rs - George E. Bailey Jr. b
erj, e U. S. District Court for We:
i» a klahoma at Oklahoma City
cathT 10 enjoin the State Board of Ed
tend 0 and the Sulphur school superi
$i 0n < | nt J rom barring the girl’s adm:
^ 0 the special institution,
the o' , att °rney general’s answer se
any can enter the Sulphur sch<
be K j * me s he makes application at t
Ihe *n§ of an official semester.
elas- 8 ailey case was a i so gj ec j as
durnt^v* 00 hr behalf of all deaf a
eann ot 6 ® ro minors in Oklahoma w
t *mmL aCq , uire an education in t
°n schools of the state.
le GISUTIVE action
Efforts t
' r ainin • ° cons olidate Negro and white
keen u * nst itutions of the state have
State r er way for some time. The
ttr$ ° ul 'd of Affairs, which adminis-
6 schools, has insisted that it
should have a legislative directive be
fore proceeding. However, a resolution
authorizing consolidation has been bot
tled up in committee in the House of
Representatives throughout the current
session.
But the matter broke into the open
in the Senate late in April. State Sen.
Glen C. Collins of Ada introduced a
resolution asking the State Board of
Education to open the Sulphur school
to Negro students. He also asked the
State Board of Affairs to transfer im
mediately all deaf students at Taft to
Sulphur and to allocate to the latter
the funds voted for the Negro deaf in
stitution.
Immediate consideration was delayed
because of the importance of the resolu
tion. When the matter came up the
following week, it became side-tracked
by an issue injected by Sen. Gene Stipe
of McAlester. He charged that the
teaching program for deaf children
throughout the state is outmoded and
should be brought up to date. As a
result, the Senate set up a special five-
member committee to investigate teach
ing methods for the deaf.
INSTITUTION DRAWS RESIDENTS
Sen. Bruce L. Frazier of Sulphur
pointed out his county has many deaf
people and persons with deaf children
who have moved there because of the
institution. They are not opposed to
integration but say it is being rushed,
Frazier said.
“If you pass this, it will create a prob
lem at the Oklahoma School for the
Deaf,” he said. “We don’t have the
building space. Give the superintendent
and those people a chance and they will
be ready for integration. It will take
some time to solve the problem.”
promote integration or segregation.
The eight bills passed the House by
majorities of two or three to one.
Several other bills sponsored by East
Texas segregationists await further
House action, but have favorable com
mittee reports.
The pupil assignment bill, HB 231,
was amended in the House, against its
sponsors’ wishes, to let local boards
decide whether they wished to exempt
students from compulsory attendance
at integrated schools. The bill originally
would have banned compulsory attend
ance in such cases, if the student
attended school elsewhere. Texas Dem
ocrats favored this law by about three
to one in a referendum vote in July
1956. (See Southern School News,
August 1956.)
Subsequent passage of HB 232 on
compulsory attendance was believed by
backers to have nullified the earlier
amendment to HB 231. The House also
approved an amendment on HB 231 to
prohibit boards from considering lan
guage or national origin in assigning
pupils. This was sponsored by represen
tatives with large Latin-American con
stituencies.
HB 239, the registration law, was
amended by the House to apply to
segregation as well as integration pro
moters.
Ralph W. Yarborough, Austin attor
ney, was elected to the U. S. Senate for
a term to run until 1959. He succeeds
William A. Blakley of Dallas, who
served as an interim, appointee pending
the election. Price Daniel resigned from
the seat to run for governor.
The official canvass showed that Yar
borough received 364,605 votes of 957,314
cast for 23 candidates. Runnerup was
Congressman Martin Dies with 290,803,
while Republican Thad Hutcheson ran
third with 219,591 votes. The Rev. M. T.
Banks, a Beaumont Negro minister,
received 2,153 votes.
After the April 2 election, the Texas
legislature passed the bill by Rep. Joe
Pool of Dallas to require runoffs in
future Senate races unless one candi
date receives a majority. The legislature
refused to pass the bill before the April
2 election.
While Yarborough usually is labeled
as a “liberal,” he declines to be typed.
He had strong backing from liberal and
labor groups and swept most precincts
where the Negro vote was heavy.
FAVORS FEDERAL AID
Yarborough said he would favor fed
eral aid in school construction, either
by a low-interest loan program or
directly. He said he does not believe
that federal control over schools would
necessarily follow.
“Either federal loans or federal grants
for construction of school buildings is
necessary because of the Republican
fiscal policies of ‘hard money’,” said
Yarborough.
At Dallas, liberal Young Democrats
retained control of their state organiza
tion after a stormy session centered
mainly about disputes over supporting
integration.
Dusty Rhodes, vice president, led the
unsuccessful fight against criticizing the
legislature’s effort to slow down inte
gration. During the dispute, Rhodes
also was ousted as vice president.
CLUB IS SPONSOR
The Dallas Young Democrats Club
sponsored the support of integration.
The Dallas Morning News reported
the fight as follows:
“Most of the bitterness came with a
resolution to condemn all segregation
bills pending in the legislature and to
‘deplore’ the legislature’s efforts to
evade, ignore and discredit the inte
gration decisions of the Supreme Court.’
“Rhodes, a pre-law student at Abilene
Christian College, offered a substitute
which would have put the Young Dem
ocrats on record as supporting the idea
‘that local school districts are the best
group to determine when any steps
toward integration can be or should be
attempted.’ Rhodes’ resolution also
would have opposed the use of force to
overrule such local decision. But Con
vention Chairman Bill Kilgarlin of
Houston gavelled Rhodes’ substitute
into failure.
And the integration resolution
reported by the Resolutions Committee
passed. It was a watered-down substi
tute for the resolution presented to the
committee Saturday by the Dallas
County Young Democrats Club.
HELP PROPOSED
The Dallas club even wanted the
Young Democrats ‘to do whatever we
can do as individuals and as an organi
zation to help any and all persons to
achieve their full constitutional rights
w ich have heretofore been denied
them, including active assistance in the
Lined up for a legal scrimmage in Texas’ effort to put the National Association
for the Advancement of Colored People out of business, opposing lawyers (above)
on April 22 awaited a district judge’s decision on a request for additional time
before trying the case. Shown here are (seated at table) Thurgood Marshall, chief
counsel for the NAACP, and C. B. Bunkley of Dallas. Behind Marshall is W. J.
Durham also of Dallas. Attorneys for the state (seated with backs to the camera)
are, Davis Grant, James N. Ludlum and John H. Minton Jr., assistant attorneys
general. Moments after this photo was made, Judge Otis Dunagan granted the
NAACP attorneys until April 29 to study new material filed by the state.
preparation, financing and presentation
of legal actions.”
“Observers said this would force the
Young Democrats to replace the Na
tional Association for the Advancement
of Colored People in paying for segre
gation suits in court.”
The U. S. Supreme Court rejected an
appeal in a school integration suit from
Wichita Falls (Alfred Avery et al v.
Floyd L. Randel et al.)
The Witchita Falls board appealed
from a circuit court decision that Dis
trict Judge Joe B. Dooley should keep
the case under study rather than dis
miss it. The board, which had nominally
desegregated one schol, argued that the
appeals court decisions will “afford a
forum for Negro people to seek con
stant judicial review of daily acts of
school administrators” and put the court
in the role of a “super school board.”
Negroes hailed the Supreme Court’s
action as a victory that would give
Negro children at Wichita Falls the
same transfer privileges as whites. In
the dispute there, when Negroes were
admitted to a former white school, the
board permitted all of the white chil
dren to transfer elsewhere, leaving it
segregated.
TRIAL BEGINS
At Tyler, trial began April 29 in the
state’s effort to get a permanent injunc
tion against the NAACP (State of Texas
v. NAACP). A temporary injunction
was granted last September by District
Judge Otis T. Dunagan. (See Southern
School News, October 1956.)
The case originally was set for April
22. Delay was sought by both sides. The
court was told that the State Bar of
Texas might intervene in the case of
alleged barratry by NAACP attorneys
in filing integration lawsuits.
The State Bar decided against inter
vention, however, when President
Ewton Gresham of Houston announced
that local grievance committees—not
the state organization—were supposed
to handle barratry and unauthorized
practice complaints.
Trustees of the Houston Independent
School District, largest segregated dis
trict in the nation, called a special meet
ing for May 6 to receive a report from a
study committee on compliance with
the U. S. Supreme Court ruling on
segregation.
Mrs. Frank Dyer, president of the
board, has expressed hope that courts
will permit Houston to delay a start on
integration until 1959. (See Southern
School News, March 1957.)
A lawsuit seeking to begin integra
tion earlier has been set for hearing
May 20 before U. S. District Judge Ben
Connally. (Beniamin et al v. Houston
1SD.)
Meanwhile, Supt. W. E. Moreland and
Dr. Alexander Frazier, assistant super
intendent in charge of curriculum,
resigned. A minority member of the
board, W. W. Kemmerer, charged both
were “coerced into resigning”—Dr.
Moreland because he did not want to
accept an assistant superintendent
favored by the board majority and Dr.
Frazier “because of school board inter
ference in the instructional program.”
The resignations are effective June 30.
Dr. Moreland declined comment on the
reasons for his action.
At Beaumont, meanwhile, the most
outspoken segregation candidates were
defeated in a school board election.
Incumbent Ralph Griffing and new
comer David Hearn won by three to one
margins over candidates sponsored by
the Beaumont Taxpayers for Segrega
tion and Good Government. Neither
Griffing nor Hearn advocate integration.
In the South Park District of Beau
mont, two incumbent board members
also defeated candidates put up by the
segregation organization.
At nearby Port Arthur, where inte
gration of the first grade is scheduled
to start in September 1957—the first
such move in East Texas—a Citizens
Council was organized to promote seg
regation.
Students at Texas Christian Univer
sity in Forth Worth voted to continue
segregation, in a campus poll. The ref
erendum showed 729 students for segre
gation; 403 for gradual integration; and
291 for immediate integration.
At the University of Texas, 148
Negroes were registered among nearly
18,000 students for the spring 1957
semester. Included were 40 graduate
students, 56 freshmen and 52 transfer
undergraduates. The school first
accepted Negro graduates in 1950 and it
abolished segregation at all levels in
September, 1956, while beginning selec
tive admission tests.
The Interfratemity Council at the
University of Texas was told to look
into possibility of abandoning its seg
regation policy.
Howard Wolf, outgoing president of
the social fraternity group, told a meet
ing of the Council: “Those who believe
that the integration of fraternities will
never come to the university fall into
the category of those who believed that
the Wright brothers airplane would
never fly.”
At Brownwood, Dr. James Taylor
suggested that the governor and legis
lature create a special commission to
study the whole segregation-desegrega
tion problem and work out an integra
tion program to be submitted to the
people.
The South’s bright economic future
may be jeopardized and the American
democratic system damaged “if we
attempt to work out our problem
through defiance of the Constitution and
the Supreme Court,” said Dr. Taylor.
Dr. Taylor, chairman of the Social
Sciences division at Southwest Texas
State College, wrote the history of the
Bikini atomic bomb test. He spoke at
Howard Payne College in Brownwood.
The Houston Informer’s sports editor
urged its Negro readers to “stay away
from all Texas League baseball games”
because Shreveport is observing the law
forbidding any Negro athletes to play in
the same contest with whites in Louisi
ana.
# # #