Newspaper Page Text
SOUTHERN SCHOOL NEWS—JULY 1958—PAGE 9
. . . An Order Is Being Entertained’
account of integration, and that this has been at the expense
of other school programs. . . .
Mr. Blossom testified that the funds of the Little Rock
School District are not unlimited, that in fact the district is
underfinanced, and the annual expenditure per child is ap
proximately $100 below the national average. He further
pointed out that whenever district funds have to be diverted
to meet unusual problems as they were during the past year,
the district suffers harm, and that such diversions may mean
that less teachers can be employed, and less instructional
equipment purchased.
Looking toward the approaching school term it was the
consensus of opinion on the part of the board’s witnesses,
and we find, that there has been no softening of the public
attitude in Little Rock toward integration, and we further
find, as heretofore stated, that unless some relief is granted
the board the conditions that will prevail in Central High
School during the 1958-59 school year will be as bad as they
were during 1957-58, and will probably deteriorate still
further.
We further find that if the attendance of Negro students
at Central High School is to be maintained during the next
school year, the board will have to have military assistance
or its equivalent, and it is financially unable to bear the
expense of hiring a sufficient number of guards to control
the situation. It cannot be expected that the Little Rock
Police Department will be in a position to detail enough men
to afford the necessary protection.
As to the need for troops when school re-convenes, Super
intendent Blossom stated that he saw nothing to indicate that
conditions at the school would be different in September than
they were throughout the past year, and that as a school
administrator he saw no lessening of responsibility for the
safety of everyone concerned. . . .
Now, while troops can disperse crowds, and can keep the
Negro students physically within the school, and while it is
possible that if troops were deployed in sufficient numbers all
over the school vandalism could be checked, the presence of
troops cannot reduce or eliminate racial tensions, or create a
climate that is conducive to education; on the contrary, the
presence of armed soldiers in a school is, as has been shown
here, disrupting to the educational process. . . .
As has been said, there can be no question that the board
made a prompt and reasonable start toward compliance with
the principles laid down in the Brown cases; thereafter, it put
its plan into operation and has adhered to it in good faith in
the face of great difficulties. Now, it has come here seeking
relief only after it had been confronted with what is, from
an educational standpoint, an intolerable situation, and it does
not ask for an abandonment of its plan nor does it attempt
to obtain an indefinite postponement. It is simply requesting
a tactical delay. We are convinced that in seeking this delay
the board is still acting in good faith, and, upon the showing
that has been made, we are satisfied that the board needs
more time to carry out its plan in an “effective manner,” and
that to grant the instant petition is in the public interest,
and is consistent with good faith compliances, at the earliest
practicable date, with the principles above mentioned. In
reaching this conclusion we are not unmindful of the admoni
tion of the Supreme Court that the vitality of those principles
“cannot be allowed to yield simply because of disagreement
with them;” here, however, as pointed out by the board in its
final brief, the opposition to integregation in Little Rock is
more than a mere mental attitude; it has manifested itself in
overt acts which have actually damaged educational stand
ards and which will continue to do so if relief is not granted.
The importance of maintaining educational standards today
is certainly no less than it has been in prior years; in fact
it is more urgent. And while the Negro students at Little
Rock have a personal interest in being admitted to the public
schools on a non-discriminatory basis as soon as practicable,
that interest is only one factor of the equation, and must be
balanced against the public interest, including the interest of
all students and potential students in the district, in having a
smoothly functioning educational system capable of furnish
ing the type of education that is necessary not only for suc
cessful living but also for the very survival of our nation and
its institutions. There is also another public interest involved,
namely, that of eliminating, or at least ameliorating, the un
fortunate racial strife and tension which existed in Little
Rock during the past year and still exists there.
When the interests involved here are balanced, it is our
opinion, in view of the situation that has prevailed and will
in the foreseeable future continue to prevail at Central High
School under existing conditions, the personal and immediate
interests of the Negro students affected, must yield tempo
rarily to the larger interests of both races . . .
It is important to realize that to grant the stay requested
by the board will not deprive any Negro student of a good
high school education. In 1957 the completely new and up-
to-date Horace Mann High School for Negroes was put into
operation, and in that school, apart from any question of
integration, the Negro student can receive an education equal
to that provided in Central High School . . .
The granting of the board’s petition does not, in our esti
mation, constitute a yielding to unlawful force or violence,
but is simply an exercise of our equitable discretion and good
judgment so as to allow a breathing spell in Little Rock, while
at the same time preserving educational standards at Central
High School.
At one point in his testimony Mr. Blossom stated, and we
agree with him, that a tactical delay is not the same as a sur
render; and that the delay here sought is not a vain thing or
a mere frustration of the plaintiffs’ rights. In the first place,
the delay, in and of itself, may well be of material value to
the board in carrying out its announced purposes. In the
two-and-one-half-year period involved tempers will have
a chance to cool down, emotions may subside to some extent,
and there may also be changes in some of the personalities
involved in the dispute. Of more significance, however, is the
fact that delay will afford time for the completion of the
Pending litigation in the state courts and for an appraisal of
fhe results of that litigation. Obviously, should the state
legislation challenged in that litigation be upheld as valid,
such a result might well have a profound effect on the situa
tion at Little Rock. On the other hand, should that legislation
held unconstitutional, and particularly if such a result
should be reached by the state courts, the people of Little
Rock might be much more willing to acquiesce in integra
tion as contemplated by the plan. . . .
The board and the superintendent, who are familiar with
the problem and whose responsibility it was in the first in
stance to decide how long a stay was desired, after consider
ing the various factors involved determine on a two-and-
one-half-year period, and deemed it desirable to resume the
plan at mid-term of the 1960-61 school year. And we do not
believe that under the circumstances the court should dis
turb their judgment, even if it were inclined to do so.
In their brief in support of their motion to dismiss the
original petition the plaintiffs cited a number of cases stand
ing for the proposition that an injunction may not be dis
solved or modified in the absence of a showing of unfore
seeable changes in conditions which have created an excep
tional situation. While none of these cases involved any prob
lem of race relations or school integration, we do not quarrel
with the general rule laid down therein, and the board in its
brief in opposition to motion concedes “that the situation
must be ‘extraordinary’ and that the circumstances must be
‘exceptional.’ ”
Here, however, there has been a very radical change of
situation since the former orders of this court were entered,
the occurrence and extent of which were not, to our mind,
foreseeable at the time. And the situation with which the
board is now confronted is certainly exceptional and extra
ordinary if not, indeed, unique, that situation being compli
cated by the vast amount of publicity that has been given
to it. . . .
As we have said, the fundamental position of the plaintiffs
in opposing the petition appears to be that popular opposition
to the plan, resulting in obstructions to its orderly opera
tion, does not form any legal basis for affording the board
any release in this case. . . .
It is one thing to say that a school board must make a
start in the direction of integration without regard to public
feelings on the subject, as Judge Hutcheson said in Jackson
v. Bowden . . .; but it is quite another thing to say that
when a school has had the experiences with its plan which
the Little Rock board has had, and when, after observing the
results of that plan in operation, it comes into federal court
seeking not to abandon the plan or to lay it aside indefinitely,
but merely a moratorium, the court must close its eyes and
ears to the practical problem with which such board is con
fronted. Such a judicial attitude would be most un-realistic.
In the instant case it is not denied that under the Brown
decisions the Negro students in the Little Rock district have
a constitutional right not to be excluded from any of the
public schools on account of race; but the board has con
vincingly shown that the time for the enjoyment of that
right has not yet come. That showing applies to the Negro
students who were in the school last year as well as to
others. While the plaintiffs contend that the rights of the
students last mentioned have become vested, no authority in
support of that proposition has been cited to us . . .
In support of their argument that if the board had used
sufficiently firm disciplinary measures it could have con
trolled the situation with
in the school, and that by
such measures it can re
establish central control
this coming year, the
plaintiffs called to the
stand the two New York
educators heretofore men
tioned, and their opinion
evidence was in line with
the plaintiffs’ contentions.
On the other hand, the
testimony of Mr. Blossom
and of Mr. Upton was to
the effect that the board
had diligently sought to
preserve discipline, that it
had expelled a few stu
dents and had suspended
others for various periods
of time, that it had under
taken to consider each case on its own merits and the effect
of the action to be taken not only upon the individual child
concerned but also upon the other students in the school...
While Dr. Rogers and Dr. Salten are doubtless well qual
ified to express opinions as to how school matters should be
handled in areas of the country with which they are familiar
and in which they have had experience, neither of those gen
tlemen has had any public school administrative experience
in the South, or any personal familiarity with the Little Rock
situation, nor has either of them ever had any experience
with the problems involved in the transition from segrega
tion to integration in a state where the former has been the
accepted and traditional mode of life of the people and where
its existence in the public schools has had the sanction of
law for so long as those schools have existed. As regards Dr.
Rogers in particular, his qualifications to speak on this subject
were seriously impaired, in our eyes, by his suggestion that
members of the student body at Central High School might
have been used, in effect, as spies upon other students . . .
We think that the board acted within its competency in
coming to that conclusion, and we do not think that its failure
to commence criminal action or to seek injunctive relief
should militate against its present petition. In the first place,
the board is not charged with the duty of commencing crim
inal prosecutions or of enforcing the criminal laws of the
state. Secondly, by reason of the nature, source and extent
of the opposition to integration in Little Rock, action by the
board looking toward criminal prosecutions or injunctions
might have aggravated rather than eased the situation. More
over, the board might have had a good deal of difficulty in
identifying the persons causing the trouble or in establishing
that their conduct constituted crimes or was of such quality
as would justify the granting of injunctive relief . . .
It being in the public interest, including the interest of
both white and Negro students at Little Rock, that we have
a peaceful interlude for the period mentioned, an order is
being entertained permitting the board to suspend the opera
tion of its said plan until mid-semester of the 1910-61 school
year, without the board, or the individual members thereof,
or the superintendent of schools being considered in contempt
of this court; and the court retains jurisdiction of this cause
for such other and further proceedings as may hereafter be
come necessary or appropriate.
Board Pres. Upton
KENTUCKY-
State Quietly Completes
Third Year Of Program
LOUISVILLE, Ky.
sntucky completed quietly
the third year of its school in
tegration program, with the super
intendent of its largest integrated
system reporting that Louisville’s
second full year of the program
“went well” despite a “somewhat
greater number of disciplinary
cases involving white and Negro
pupils. (See “School Boards and
Schoolmen.”)
The president of Kentucky State Col
lege, formerly for Negroes only, praised
the state’s “steadily improving social
climate,” noting increased integration in
school and non-school fields. (See
“What They Say.”)
The Louisville Methodist Conference
announced plans for desegregating two
Methodist colleges in the fall of 1959.
(See “In the Colleges.”)
with six teachers, has been closed and
the children distributed among nearby
white schools.
5) The pattern under which the school
system now works will continue for
1958-59.
Dr. Carmichael again praised “the
very fine work of principals, teachers
and other workers” in making the pro
gram “go well,” and added:
“Their alertness in discovering inci
dents and their wisdom in handling
them keep group problems from devel
oping. Their respect for the individual,
their concern for human values and
good human relations, and their loyalty
and cooperation keep the program going
smoothly.”
The chairman of the President’s
Committee on Government Employ
ment Policies told a Frankfort audience
that “President Eisenhower has done
more to implement and improve the lot
of the Negro in America than any other
President since Abraham Lincoln” and
credited the “sheer courage of hun
dreds of Negro Americans” with help
ing to achieve “gratifying change.”
(See “What They Say.”)
Kentucky in June completed without
incident the third year of a school in
tegration program begun in 1955.
The end of the school year found “in
tegrated situations” prevailing in dis
tricts where more than 80 per cent of
the state’s Negroes live, with 55 of 170
bi-racial districts lacking any an
nounced program, and with several
districts (as reported in earlier issues
of Southern School News) , planning
to begin programs this fall.
Thirty-eight per cent of the state s
school-age Negroes live in Louisville,
where they constitute nearly 27 per cent
of the public school enrollment. Under
the system’s flexible-transfer or free-
choice arrangement, 78.2 per cent of the
total enrollment of 46,022 pupils m 1957-
58 attended mixed schools, 10.7 per cent
were in all-white student bodies, 11.1
per cent in all-Negro student bodies.
T IN SCHOOLS
Louisville’s 75 schools, 57 had
1 student bodies in 1957-58 (up
rom the preceding year); 10 were
hite (down one), and eight were
egro (down one). The percentage
lites in all-white schools declined
16.9 in 1956-57 to 14.8 in 1957-58,
>f Negroes in all-Negro schools for
jme years from 53.1 to 40 per cent.
ing this increase in the amount of
regation for the second year over
rst. Sunt. Omer Carmichael sum-
1) Specific cases of discipline involv
ing Negro and white pupils with one
another were somewhat greater the sec
ond year than the first.
This was anticipated.
‘MORE NORMAL’
The first year, everyone made un
usual efforts to have things go well; the
second year was a more normal situa
tion.
Another factor is the fact that in the
Negro schools discipline was more au
thoritarian than in the white. Negro
children naturally have more difficulty
in adjusting to the more flexible situa
tion in the former white schools in
which most of the mixing of the races
has occurred.
2) Negro parents continued to be
very cooperative. They worked well
with principals and teachers.
PARENTAL RELATIONS
3) Relationships of Negro and white
parents in Parent-Teacher Associations
of the integrated schools continued in a
spirit of mutual consideration and re
spect.
4) In September 1956, when desegre
gation was begun, four small Negro
schools were abandoned and their pu
pils assigned to what had been white
schools. With the close of 1957-58 school
year, another Negro school, this one
Dr. R. B. Atwood, president of Ken
tucky State College, to labor union del
egates to a national meeting in Louis
ville June 21:
“Kentucky’s steadily improving so
cial climate has made the state a place
where people can work together.
“While Kentucky has problems com
mon to all the southern states, the dif
ference between our state and others is
that we are able to sit down together,
with mutual respect, and work things
out.”
Citing the state’s school integration
program, Dr. Atwood added:
ACCEPTED AS MEMBERS
“Seventy-nine per cent of the state’s
ministerial associations have accepted
Negroes as members, and 65 per cent of
all Kentucky’s general hospitals accept
Negroes as patients ... on the debit
side, the Negro teacher has not been
integrated into the public-school system
nearly so rapidly as the Negro pupil.
“But we’re getting along in human
relations which are so often charged
with emotion in other places.”
Dr. Archibald J. Carey Jr., former
delegate to the United Nations and now
chairman of President Eisenhower s
Committee on Government Employment
Policies, to 82 graduating seniors of
Kentucky State College at Frankfort:
“For 3% centuries this country has
maintained a double standard of moral
ity. For 250 years there was human
slavery.
“Although we have abolished slavery,
it has been continued through discrim
ination . . . [though] no other nation
has set for itself higher ideals.
CITES CHANGES
“But changes are taking place—grat
ifying changes ... in the armed forces,
in housing, in public education. . . .
Why?
“This is a smaller world, transporta
tion is more rapid, communications are
better. This may not make men bro
thers, but it sure makes them neigh
bors. . . .
“Leadership provided from the White
House by Presidents Roosevelt, Tru
man, and Eisenhower has played a ma
jor part.
“President Eisenhower has done more
to implement and improve the lot of the
Negro in America than any President
since Abraham Lincoln. . . .
“And there is the sheer courage of
hundreds of Negro Americans who are
literally living through an age of hell
and terror so that unborn generations
may be free.”
The Louisville Methodist Conference,
meeting at Owensboro June 26, ap
proved a plan for desegregation of Ken
tucky Wesleyan and Lindsey Wilson
colleges in the fall of 1959.
Wesleyan has an enrollment of 802.
It is located near Owensboro. Lindsey
Wilson, at Columbia, has 209 students.
The conference made no comment on
the plan to admit Negro students to the
previously all-white institutions next
year.
According to Southern School News
records, this action will bring the num
ber of institutions of higher learning
now in the process of desegregation or
already desegregated to 30 of 40 col
leges, including all tax-supported col
leges, in Kentucky.
# # #