Newspaper Page Text
PAGE 4—JUNE 1957—SOUTHERN SCHOOL NEWS
Virginia’s Pupil Placement Law Is
Challenged by Number of Parents
RICHMOND, Va.
irginia’s pupil placement
law faced a challenge from a
number of school patrons last
month, while attorneys for the
state and two local school boards
struck back at a federal judge
who had ruled the law unconsti
tutional. (See “Legal Action.”)
Mrs. Theo T. DeFebio, whose
two sons were suspended from
Fairfax County schools because of
her failure to sign placement
forms (see last month’s Southern
School News) , announced
through her attorneys that the Vir
ginia Supreme Court of Appeals
will be asked on June 10 to order
readmission of the two suspended
boys.
Meanwhile, attorneys for the state
and for the Norfolk and Newport News
school boards appealed to the U. S.
Fourth Circuit Court from the decision
of District Judge Walter E. Hoffman, in
which he had ordered desegregation
in those two cities and had declared the
pupil placement law unconstitutional.
(See “Legal Action.”)
In an appeal brief, Judge Hoffman
was charged with using “intemperate
speed” and with abusing his discretion
in outlawing the pupil placement law.
He was charged also with having pre
pared his desegregation decision “ap
parently in advance” of the hearing in
the cases.
Judge Hoffman also was verbally at
tacked by U.S. Sen. Harry F. Byrd,
who told an audience in Hoffman’s
home town of Norfolk that the judge
showed “arrogance and prejudice” in
statements from the bench last Novem
ber concerning the school segregation
situation in Virginia.
Nicky DeFebio, 9, and Teddy DeFebio,
14, were suspended from schools in Fair
fax County in April because their
mother had refused to sign placement
applications for them. Formal place
ment applications were necessary in
their cases because the boys had en
rolled on Jan. 18, about two weeks af
ter the law took effect requiring the
parents of all new students entering
Virginia schools to fill out placement
applications.
Mrs. DeFebio declined to sign, ex
plaining that this “is a matter of con
science and morals—the purpose of this
placement program is to deny a seg
ment of the American population the
right to equal education.” The DeFebios
are white.
When Mrs. DeFebio failed to sign
during the 15 days permitted by the
law, her sons were dropped from
school.
BOARD STATEMENT
On April 30 the three-member Place
ment Board, meeting in Richmond, of
fered Mrs. DeFebio, through her attor
neys, a limited compromise. She was
told she could sign the forms “under
protest” and the two boys would then
be readmitted to school. The board is
sued a statement which said, in part:
“The board . . . recognizes the right
of every citizen to his religious and
personal beliefs; and on the assump
tion that Mrs. DeFebio’s refusal to sign
the application is based on sincere con
viction, the board has no thought or
desire to restrict or hamper Mrs. De
Febio’s beliefs or rights.
“It is suggested to her counsel, there
fore, that if Mrs. DeFebio would exe
cute the applications required by law,
the board would act on the applica
tions. and that neither Mrs. DeFebio
no r her children would be prejudiced
should she add to the application that
the same was signed ‘under protest’
and on condition that her act would not
constitute the waiver of any legal or
constitutional right to which she cr
her children are entitled.”
ATTORNEYS’ STATEMENT
On May 1 Mrs. DeFebio’s attorneys,
Albert I. Kassabian and C. Douglas
Adams Jr. of Annandale, announced
that she would not sign and that they
would institute court action. A state
ment released by the attorneys said
Mrs. DeFebio would refuse to sign
“notwithstanding her deep concern over
threats that her children would be
taken away from her and placed in the
hands of the State Welfare Depart
ment.”
SEN. HARRY F. BYRD
Critical Of Judge
Later in May, Mrs. DeFebio’s attor
neys announced that they will go be
fore the Virginia Supreme Court of
Appeals on June 10. The motion ask
ing readmission of the boys to school
contends that their suspension was
“arbitrary, capricious, unlawful and
void” for these reasons:
1) It deprives the boys of their right
to attend public schools “as guaranteed
by law.”
2) It forces them to violate the Vir
ginia compulsory school attendance
law.
3) The state constitution puts gen
eral authority for supervision of schools
“solely in the State Board of Education”
and local supervision in local school
boards, “not in the Pupil Placement
Board or any other agency.”
4) The Pupil Placement Act violates
the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S.
Constitution.
OTHERS FAIL TO SIGN
In Richmond, parents of more than
300 children have failed to sign place
ment forms as required by law. School
Supt. H. I. Willett said only a very
few of the children are white. He said
he didn’t know how many of the par
ents had flatly refused to sign and how
many simply were tardy in handling
the matter.
The 300 cases were reported to the
Placement Board, and the board took
action which appeared to leave the way
open for the children to complete the
current school year, even if their par
ents fail to comply with the law.
The board asked Richmond school of
ficials to determine why the forms were
not signed. Principals of the schools
involved were assigned the task of in
vestigating the cases, and it appeared
likely that this procedure would not be
completed before schools close June 12.
Oliver W. Hill, NAACP attorney, said
he represents “a large number” of the
parents who refused to sign. The Rich
mond edition of the Afro-American
newspaper has advised parents not to
sign.
In processing about 8,500 forms from
throughout the state, the Placement
Board encountered one outright refusal
to sign on the part of parents of a
Negro child in Norfolk. Norfolk au
thorities also have said that parents of
two other Negro children there have
refused to sign.
HEARING JUNE 11
The Pupil Placement Act (Chapter
70, Acts of the General Assembly, spe
cial session of 1956) will figure prom
inently in a hearing before the Fourth
Circuit Court in Asheville, N.C., on
June 11.
Attorneys for the state and for the
school boards of Norfolk and Newport
News will seek a reversal of District
Judge Walter Hoffman’s decision which
ordered desegregation in those two cities
and which also declared the Placement
Act to be unconstitutional. (School
B^ard of Nc’mort News v. Jerome A.
Atkins, and School Board of Norfolk v.
Leola Pearl Beckett.) Desegregation
wouH have to begin by September in
both cities, under the order as issued.
The brief in the NewDort News case
("the brief in the Norfolk case is sim
ilar) says, in part:
“The District Court in this case has
arbitrarily set aside a Virginia statute
just two weeks after its effective date,
before any substantial action was taken
pursuant to it and in the absence of
anv knowledge of the method of its op
eration in practice. It has taken this
action, we believe, despite rulings by
this court [the Circuit Court] in sim
ilar situations contrary to its position.
. . . The Supreme Court directed that
segregation be ended with deliberate
speed; the District Court, disregarding
uncontradicted facts of record, decreed
its end with intemperate speed. . . .
“Virginia's laws do not differ sub
stantially from those of North Carolina
and South Carolina. The statutes of
both of those states have been upheld
by this court. It has toid plaintiffs there
that administrative remedies provided
by those statutes must be exhausted
first. The District Court was in error in
failing to reach the same result here . . .
“The decree ordering substantially
immediate desegregation was not justi
fied by the facts of record. Newport
News has a school population that is
almost 60 per cent Negro. The differ
ences between the white and the Ne
gro pupils are very marked indeed. All
of the responsible local officials are of
the opinion that desegregation in the
immediate future will be destructive to
the school system and to the best inter
ests of the pupils of both races. In these
circumstances, nothing is to be gained
and much is to be lost by the decree
for immediate desegregation.
“The pattern that should be followed
is that established by Judge Hutcheson
(District Court at Richmond) in the
Prince Edward County case. He fol
lowed the great equity tradition to bal
ance the re’ief sought by the plaintiffs
against the harm that would be caused
by the grant of such relief. He there
fore refused to order immediate de
segregation. . . .
“This is not, of course, a case of chil
dren seeking to assert their rights. It is
a struggle between adults. In the strug
gle, the children are helpless pawns.
That is the irony of the chaos into
which the representatives of these
plaintiffs have plunged Virginia. If they
win the battle, they will, of course, lose
the war. Courts cannot force 99 per
cent of the white people to do what
they are convinced is wrong; there are
not marshals enough nor jails enough
to accomplish that result. All that will
emerge is a generation of damaged
children of both races who have re
ceived inferior schooling and become
imbued with bitterness. Yet that is what
the District Court proposes. To call its
action arbitrary is to speak only a half-
truth; its action is so fundamentally
unwise and hard that it shocks the con
science.”
HOFFMAN CRITICIZED
Judge Hoffman, who prior to being
named to the judiciary was Republican
candidate for attorney general of Vir
ginia in 1953, also came in for attack
from Democratic Sen. Harry Flood
Byrd of Virginia.
Speaking on May 9 to some 600 per
sons at the Hampton Roads Maritime
dinner in Norfolk, Byrd accused Hoff
man of “bombastic and political state
ments.” Referring to the Norfolk and
Newport News desegregation cases,
Byrd said: “I am reliably informed that
a federal judge stated from the bench
before hearing evidence or arguments
on an integration case that he was in
clined ‘to throw the whole case out
of the window.’ This he did by reading
a decision prepared before the hearing.
“This judge further said from the
bench, ‘The integration problem will
never be resolved in Virginia until we
have a different political leadership.’
This remark evidently had reference to
the coming campaign, when the effort
will be made to elect a Republican gov
ernor of Virginia.
“We vest great power in our judges
and expect decisions to be rendered af
ter due hearings and without preju
dice or predetermination.
“Judge Hoffman must have known
that he was dealing with a very explo
sive subject and that such a display of
arrogance and prejudice from the bench
could not fail to cause bitter resentment
and inflame public opinion.”
SEEK DISMISSAL
The state last month asked dismissal
of two district court suits filed by the
NAACP attacking the constitutionality
of five so-called “NAACP laws” en
acted by the General Assembly last
year. Two of the laws require the
NAACP and other organizations in the
field of race relations to register with
the State Corporation Commission and
to disclose certain membership and
financial records. The other three laws
amend previously existing statutes
dealing with illegal practice of law.
A special three-judge federal court
will hear the cases here on June 26.
LEGISLATIVE ACTION
Two legislative committees created
by the General Assembly last year are
continuing their probe into activities of
the NAACP.
Southern School News
Southern School News is the official publication of the Southern Education
Reporting Service, an objective, fact-finding agency established by southern
newspaper editors and educators with the aim of providing accurate, unbiased
information to school administrators, public officials and interested lay citizens
on developments in education arising from the U. S. Supreme Court opinion of
May 17, 1954 declaring segregation in the public schools unconstitutional. SERS
is not an advocate, is neither pro-segregation nor anti-segregation, but simply
reports the facts as it finds them, state by state.
Published monthly by Southern Education Reporting Service at 1109 19th Ave.,
S., Nashville, Tenn.
Second class mail privileges authorized at Nashville, Tenn., under the authority
of the act of March 3, 1879.
OFFICERS
Frank Ahlgren Chairman
Thomas R. Waring Vice-Chairman
Don Shoemaker . Executive Director
Patrick McCauley, Assistant to the Executive Director
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Frank Ahlgren, Editor, Memphis Com
mercial-Appeal, Memphis, Tenn.
Harvie Branscomb, Chancellor, Vander
bilt University, Nashville, Tenn.
Virginius Dabney, Editor, Richmond
Times-Dispatch, Richmond, Va.
Luther H. Foster, President, Tuskegee
Institute, Tuskegee, Ala.
Coleman A. Harwell, Editor. Nashville
Tennessean, Nashville, Tenn.
Henry H. Hill, President. George Pea
body College, Nashville, Tenn.
C. A. McKnight. Editor, Charlotte Ob
server, Charlotte, N.C.
Charles Moss, Executive Editor, Nash
ville Banner, Nashville, Tenn.
George N. Redd, Dean, Fisk University,
Nashville, Tenn.
Don Shoemaker, Exec. Director, Sou.
Education Reporting Service
Bert Struby, Editor, Macon Telegraph,
Macon, Ga.
Thomas R. Waring, Editor, Charleston
News & Courier, Charleston, S.C.
Henry I. Willett, Superintendent of
Schools, Richmond, Va.
CORRESPONDENTS
ALABAMA
William H. McDonald, Editorial
Writer Montgomery Advertiser
ARKANSAS
Thomas D. Davis, News Editor, Ar
kansas Gazette
DELAWARE
William P. Frank, Staff Writer, Wil
mington News
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Jeanne Rogers, Education Writer,
Washington Post & Times Herald
FLORIDA
Bert Collier, Staff Writer, Miami
Herald
GEORGIA
Joseph B. Parham, Editor, The Macon
News
KENTUCKY
Weldon James, Editorial Writer,
Louisville Courier-Journal
LOUISIANA
Leo Adde, Editorial Writer, New Or
leans Item
MARYLAND
Edgar L. Jones, Editorial Writer,
Baltimore Evening Sun
MISSISSIPPI
Kenneth Toler, Mississippi Bureau,
M emphis Commercial-Appeal
MISSOURI
Robert Lasch, Editorial Writer, St.
Louis Post-Dispatch
NORTH CAROLINA
Jay Jenkins, Raleigh Bureau Chief,
Charlotte Observer
OKLAHOMA
Leonard Jackson, Staff Writer, Okla
homa City Oklahoman-Times
SOUTH CAROLINA
W. D. Workman Jr., Special Corre
spondent, Columbia, S.C.
TENNESSEE
James Elliott, Staff Writer, Nashville
Banner
Wallace Westfeldt, Staff Writer,
Nashville Tennessean
TEXAS
Richard M. Morehead, Austin Bureau,
Dallas News
VIRGINIA
Overton Jones, Editorial Writer,
Richmond Times-Dispatch
WEST VIRGINIA
Thomas F. Stafford, Assistant to the
Editor, Charleston Gazette
MAIL ADDRESS
P.O. Box 6156, Acklen Station, Nashville 5, Tenn.
Return Postage Guaranteed
The Committee on Law Reform and
Racial Activities spent two days in
Farmville quizzing witnesses concern
ing aspects of the Prince Edward Coun
ty desegregation case. After question
ing 36 persons, Delegate John M. Thom
son of Alexandria, committee chairman,
said that “testimony indicated there
could have been violation of the canons
Year-Eml Summary
1) The General Assembly enact
ed a package of anti-integration
laws, including those to set up a
Pupil Placement Board and to
deny state funds to any school
that integrates.
2) A U. S. district court refused
to set a deadline for desegregation
in the Prince Edward County case
while the U. S. Supreme Court re
fused to review Arlington County
and Charlottesville desegregation
orders and a district court ordered
Norfolk and Newport News to de
segregate.
3) NAACP activities were under
investigation by legislative com
mittees with the NAACP fighting
back through courts.
4) The segregation issue was in
jected into the gubernatorial cam
paign. Atty. Gen. J. Lindsay Al
mond Jr., candidate for Democratic
nomination, clashed verbally with
State Sen. Ted Dalton, possible
GOP candidate, over state’s segre
gation policy.
5) The Pupil Placement Act was
challenged by some parents who
refused to sign placement forms.
of professional ethics [in the Prince
Edward case] since some witnesses tes
tified that they had no idea of paying
court costs or attorneys.”
He added that “six years after the
suit was instituted, some witnesses don’t
recognize themselves as plaintiffs in that
suit”
But S. W. Tucker of Emporia, an at
torney representing some of the NAACP
members questioned by the committee,
said that the questioning had not de
veloped the full circumstances of the
suit. “The committee had already con
ceived its opinion,” he said, “and called
witnesses to bear it out and avoided
any who might have refuted it.”
CHARLOTTESVILLE HEARING
The Committee on Offenses Against
the Administration of Justice conduct
ed a hearing in Charlottesville on May
15.
The Charlottesville hearing, like the
one in Farmville, was closed to the pub
lic. After the session, it was learned
that some of the plaintiffs in the Char- ,
lottesville desegregation suit had testi
fied to the committee that when they
signed papers dealing with the race
matter, they were not aware that they
were authorizing suits to be brought
in their names.
Other plaintiffs, however, who were
summoned by the committee but not j
called to testify, told reporters they
were fully aware of what they were
signing. Oliver W. Hill, NAACP at
torney, said “they [the committee] g e j
people with no experience in this kind
of thing and ask leading questions • ■ ■
Nobody has an opportunity to exam
ine witnesses to see if they understan., I
the purpose of what they are saying-
Albert A. Smoot, candidate for Ale*^
andria’s seat in the House of Delega te -
now held by James M. Thomson, stru
out at Gov. Stanley and Thomson in
statement on May 9. “No window dress^
ing, no muddying of the waters, no e
that G°
nials, can change the fact
fill'
-
Stanley and James Thomson are
ing to close our public schools,’ he sa ^
“Gov. Stanley, in his statement a^
press conference at Richmond, P r0 '. c(
the truth of what I have been saV
all along. He stated that his admims
tion is willing to see the public s< L. r .
close in Arlington County and C
lottesville. This will happen to A* eX -
dria if Gov. Stanley and James Th°
have their way.”
STANLEY’S STATEMENT
In his press conference, the g° ver U )J [
had been asked what advice he '■ v0 ^ eS
give school officials in those two CI
(Continued On Next Page)