Newspaper Page Text
PAGE 10—AUGUST I960—SOUTHERN SCHOOL NEWS
VIRGINIA
New Placement Board Appointed;
Assigns Negroes to White Schools
RICHMOND, Va.
T hree new appointees assumed
office as the Virginia Pupil
Placement Board and at their first
meeting broke with the board’s
past practice by voluntarily as
signing Negroes to white schools.
(See “School Boards and School
men.”)
The U.S. Fourth Circuit Court
of Appeals ruled that four Negro
applicants for white schools did
not have to follow the adminis
trative procedures of the pupil
placement act because the act was
being administered unconstitu
tionally. (See “Legal Action.”)
In addition to the new place
ment board’s action, gradual
spread of integration in Virginia
was indicated by Fairfax Coun
ty’s announcement that it would
“not oppose” entrance of three
Negroes into all-white schools,
and by announcements indicating
the probable admittance of addi
tional Negroes to predominantly
white schools in Alexandria. (See
“School Boards and Schoolmen.”)
The Prince Edward County
board of supervisors enacted two
ordinances to promote the de
velopment of private schools.
(See “Community Action.”)
For the first time since its creation
over three years ago, Virginia’s Pupil
Placement Board voluntarily assigned
Negroes to white schools.
The unprecedented action was taken
by a brand new board of three mem
bers appointed by Gov. Lindsay Al
mond to replace the three who re
signed earlier this year because they
were out of sympathy with the state’s
“freedom of choice” policy in school
segregation (See Southern School
News, March 1960).
The assignments involved 12 Negroes
in Arlington County. Two will go to
what is now an all-white elementary
school and two to an all-white high
school. The other eight will attend
predominantly white schools that al
ready have desegregated.
The Negroes had brought suit for
admittance to the Arlington schools and
the county school board had, in effect,
recommended their admission (See
“School Boards and Schoolmen”).
NEW MEMBERS
The three new members of the Pupil
Placement Board are Dr. E. J. Oglesby,
69, a math professor at the University
of Virginia and president of the Albe-
marle-Charlottesville chapter of the
segregationist Defenders of State Sov
ereignty and Individual Liberties; A. L.
Wingo, 55, co-ordinator of testing,
guidance and research in the State De
partment of Education; and Edward T.
Justis, 52, assistant supervisor of re
habilitation in the State Department of
Education. Oglesby was elected chair
man.
The new members replaced Beverly
H. Randolph, Hugh V. White and An
drew A. Farley.
Almond said he had “persuaded” the
three new members to accept the job
as a public duty.
“I have never spent more time or
worked harder on any appointment,”
the governor said. “I have interviewed
numerous citizens and have found no
one seeking the position or anxious to
serve.”
Asked if the new board members are
in sympathy with the state’s “freedom
of choice” policy, Almond replied:
“These gentlemen will discharge their
responsibilities consonant with law,
having a due regard for the established
policy of this state—to preserve the
cause of public education, recognizing
the legal merits of issues which may
confront them.”
APPOINTS WILKERSON
Dr. Woodrow W. Wilkerson has been
appointed by Almond to head Virginia’s
Department of Education.
As superintendent of public instruc
tion, Wilkerson will succeed Dr. Davis
Y. Paschall, who has resigned as of
Aug. 15 to become president of the Col
lege of William and Mary.
Wilkerson is now director of the di
vision of secondary education in the
State Department of Education. He is
47 years old, is a native of Prince Ed
ward County, and has been with the
education department since 1945.
The school board of Fairfax County,
where integration has not yet taken
place, adopted an 11-year grade-at-a-
time desegregation plan under which
it said it would “not oppose” the entry
of three Negroes into white schools this
fall.
HEARING SET
The board filed its plan with the fed
eral district court at Alexandria
(Blackwell v. School Board of Fairfax
County). A hearing in the case was
set for Sept. 8.
The three Negroes whose admission
to white schools would not be opposed
by the board are applying to enter the
first and second grades. After the 1960-
61 school year, one additional grade
would be integrated each year, under
the board’s plan.
Altogether, 30 Negro children have
applied for enrollment in white schools
in Fairfax. Seven applied for the first
and second grades. Four of these were
turned down, two because they did
not submit legal proof of their ages and
two because the board claimed they did
not live closer to the white schools
than they did to Negro schools.
The remainder of the 30 were re
jected since they were applying for
grades above the second. In the cases
of some of these, other reasons for re
jection also were cited.
Otto L. Tucker, an attorney for
Negroes involved, expressed dissatis
faction with the Fairfax plan and said
a court test was “likely.”
Two of Fairfax’s next-door neigh
bors—Arlington County and the city of
Remedies Wud Me ‘-Al
ec^ual
Alexandria—indicated they were pre
pared to extend integration already
occurring in those communities.
The Arlington school board advised
the federal district court at Alexandria
that it would not oppose the applica
tions of 10 Negroes who seek admission
to predominantly white schools.
The Alexandria school board in
formed the court that it would admit
10 Negroes to predominantly white
schools if the court holds that the
board has placement power.
At scattered localities in the state,
Negroes filed applications for admission
to white schools. Local boards sent the
applications on to the State Pupil
Placement Board in most instances.
CHARGES ABUSES
In Norfolk, a member of the General
Assembly asked the governor to ap
point a commission to re-examine the
tuition grant law “to eliminate the
abuses that are being perpetrated at
the present time.”
Del. Henry E. Howell wrote the gov
ernor:
“The Norfolk Ledger-Dispatch pub
lished a list of the citizens of Norfolk
who had applied for and received tui
tion grants. There were over 1,000 citi
zens who had applied and approxi
mately one-quarter of a million dollars
had been granted to these individuals.
“A number of the recipients were
professional people and people of some
means. Many of the children were at
tending schools in which there was no
threat of integration and the grants
were merely being used to subsidize
private education for parents who de
sired their children to have private
education before the school crisis in
Virginia. . . .
“It is ironical to me that many in
dividuals who disclaim governmental
subsidization are the first to get in line
when the subsidy is made available to
them.”
Under Virginia law, a tuition grant
is available to any child who wishes to
attend a non-sectarian private school
or a public school outside the locality
in which he lives.
A federal district judge’s ruling that
four Negro applicants did not have to
follow pupil placement act procedures
was upheld by the U.S. Fourth Circuit
Court of Appeals (Farley v. Turner).
The State Pupil Placement Board
had rejected the applications of four
Norfolk Negroes for admission to white
schools despite the fact that the Nor
folk school board had recommended
that the children be admitted.
District Judge Walter E. Hoffman or
dered the placement board to reverse
its decision and to admit the Negroes,
or else to face contempt of court cita
tions. The board assigned them but ap
pealed the case to the Circuit Court.
In upholding Judge Hoffman, the
Circuit Court said that it had always
required Negroes seeking admission to
(See VIRGINIA, Page 11)
Decision in Virginia Placement Case
The U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld
a federal district court decision ordering four Negro children
in Norfolk admitted to predominantly white schools, bypass
ing assignment by the Virginia Pupil Placement Board. The
text of the decision in Pupil Placement Board of the Com
monwealth of Virginia v. Turner et al follows:
“The applicability of the long-established principle that
one need not exhaust futile administrative remedies is the
issue on this appeal.
“Under the Virginia Pupil Placement Act, four Negro
children, who were plaintiffs below and are the present
appellees, were recommended by the School Board of the
City of Norfolk for transfer to predominantly white schools.
The School Board transmitted these recommendations to
to the State Pupil Placement Board, which declined to make
the enrollments, despite the fact that the four children had
successfully qualified therefor under the local placement
standards and criteria.
Member Testified
“A member of the State Pupil Placement Board testified
in the District Court that ‘the reasons that the School Board
found sufficient and the reasons that the Court found suf
ficient were hearsay as to us and we did not feel that we
were bound by it, sir.’ He acknowledged that this disposition
of the matter was in accordance with ‘our general policy.’
It was further explained that the policy of the Pupil Place
ment Board is to routinely deny all applications for en
rollment of a child in a school predominantly attended by
children of the other race, and to force a protest and hearing
in every case. The court found as a fact that in placing more
than 450,000 children in the public schools of Virginia, no
Negro child has ever been placed by this Board in any white
school.
“In these circumstances, the District court concluded that
the Pupil Placement Board’s policy and practices were
unconstitutional. It ordered the admission of the four plain
tiffs in accordance with the School Board’s recommendations
without requiring them to proceed before the State Pupil
Placement Board.
Court Required
“This court has consistently required Negro pupils desirous
of being reassigned to schools without regard to race to
pursue established administrative procedures before seeking
the intervention of a federal court. This insistence is pre
dicated upon the availability of a reasonably expeditious
and adequate administrative remedy. Where, however, the
administrative procedures fail to meet this standard, courts
may not deny their constitutional rights to persons other
wise entitled to relief. On this point, we are in full accord
with the Fifth Circuit’s views in Mannings v. Board of
Public Instruction.
“We agree with the District Court’s conclusions as set
forth in its opinion . . . and its judgment is affirmed.”
# # #
U. S. JUDGE OREN LEWIS TAKES BENCH AT RICHMOND
Chats with U.S. Judge Albert V. Bryan, Alexandria (Right)
GEORGIA
Propose Separate Schools
For Atlanta’s Boys, Girls
MACON, Ga.
S egregation by sex for At
lanta’s high schools in the
event of racial desegregation was
recommended by a Fulton County
grand jury. (See “Community
Action.”)
The grand jury also suggested
that a bi-racial committee might
have to originate with civic groups,
rather than elected officials. (See
“Community Action.”)
The Georgia Education Assn,
delegation to the annual National
Education Assn, convention in
Los Angeles supported the parent
organization’s resolution on seg
regation. (See “School Boards
and Schoolmen.”)
Separate high schools for boys and
girls if Atlanta’s schools are integrated
were recommended by a Fulton County
(Atlanta) grand jury.
The schools in Georgia’s capital al
ways have been segregated by races.
Until 1947, the largest high schools
were segregated by sex. The grand
jury wants to go back to this policy
“if economically possible” in event of
racial desegregation.
Oby T. Brewer Jr., vice president of
the Atlanta Board of Education, said
it is “definitely wise planning to con
sider separate physical facilities for
boys and girls.” But he warned that
there would be “expensive and diffi
cult problems” to overcome in estab
lishing separate schools.
NOT OPPOSED
The Negro school board member, Dr.
Rufus Clement, president of Atlanta
University, said he is already on rec
ord as “not at all being opposed to
separate high schools for boys and girls
if it will ease the situation and permit
us to keep our schools.”
U. S. District Judge Frank A. Hooper
has ordered Atlanta school desegrega
tion by May 1, 1961. Desegregation is
expected to take place in September of
next year unless the state closes public
schools, as it has warned it may do in
order to avoid racial integration in
classrooms.
The Fulton grand jury condemned
such Negro activities as “mass picket
ing and the so-called non-violent
marches.” It said “no physical activity,
even passively inclined, can supplant
legal recourse, which is the Negro’s
guaranteed right,” and warned that
“one untoward incident could easily
degenerate an orderly group into a
mob, with all the ensuing violence.”
The presentments urged that city
and county schools be kept open and
urged action to improve race relations
by upgrading Negro housing, recrea
tion and hospitals, as well as by in
creasing the ratio of Negro to white
policemen.
SUGGEST COMMITTEE
The grand jury also suggested that
the setting up of an Atlanta-wide bi-
racial committee “might have to origi
nate with the Chamber of Commerce
or a similar group rather than through
the instigation of elected officials.”
A request for appointment of a bi-
racial panel by the preceding grand
jury had been rejected by Atlanta
Mayor William B. Hartsfield, who said
such a committee “is not going to solvf
racial problems here.”
The Atlanta Chamber of Commerce
declined a similar suggestion from an
other grand jury some time ago.
No section of the nation is better
able to resolve racial differences, the
presentments said, “especially if native
residents, white and Negro, are allowed
to handle problems without outside
interference.”
p
LEG/
il AC
TION
Use of recreation areas on a non-
segregated basis was asked of the Sa
vannah Recreation Commission in a
petition signed by 23 Negroes.
The group said Negroes were being
denied use of park areas except on a
segregated basis, according to W. W
Law, president of the Savannah chap
ter of the National Assn, for the Ad
vancement of Colored People.
The Georgia Education Assn, (white)
delegation attending the annual con
vention of the National Education Assn,
in Los Angeles supported the parent
organization’s resolutions committee’s
stand on segregation.
The NEA stand suggested “that all
problems concerning the question of
segregated public education be left to
the state and local level.”
L. H. Pitts, executive secretary of
the Georgia Teachers and Education
Assn. (Negro), however, called for a
stronger integration stand at an open
hearing of the resolutions committee.
E. C. Mitcham, GEA president, said di
rectors of the Negro group had said
that Pitts’ stand was his own and not
that of the GTEA.
The North Georgia Methodist Con
ference, meeting in Atlanta, voted 121
to 97 to eliminate from a report of the
Board of Christian Social Relations a
section praising Negro lunch counter
sit-in demonstrators.
Commenting on the report, Bishop
Arthur J. Moore said that everyone
must obey the law, sit-in demonstrators
as well as others.
On July 4, several Atlanta Negro
students placed three wreaths on the
steps of the State capitol. With each
wreath was a sign quoting the Declara
tion of Independence: “We hold these
truths to be self-evident, that all me®
are created equal, that they are en
dowed by their Creator with certai®
inalienable rights . . .”
The only spectators were newsmen
who had been notified in advance.
REBUKED PHOTOGRAPHER
DeKalb Rep. James A. Mackay re
buked a state photographer for takin!
pictures of the legislator’s address be
fore a Negro audience.
Campaigning for re-election, Mackay
was speaking to an Atlanta University
group when Ed Friend arrived and be
gan snapping pictures.
Friend was reprimanded by Go'> i
Ernest Vandiver last year for taking
pictures when he was supposed to be o®
duty as a State Forestry Dept, employe
Since then, he has used his arrnua
leave time in driblets to take photo'
graphs for his race file. # # ’