Newspaper Page Text
PAGE 2—JUNE, 1963—SOUTHERN SCHOOL NEWS
MISSISSIPPI
Negro Gets
JACKSON
1VT ississippi’s second Negro
student—21-year-old Cleve
McDowell of Drew in the pre
dominately Negro-populated Del
ta county of Sunflower—won a
federal court order May 27 for
enrollment in the School of Law
of the University of Mississippi at
Oxford and entered quietly on
June 5.
The 114-year-old educational insti
tution was first desegregated on Oct.
1, 1962, with the enrollment of James
H. Meredith on order of the federal
courts. McDowell’s enrollment, unlike
Meredith’s, was uneventful although
soldiers and federal authorities main
tained close surveillance.
Judge S. C. Mize of the Southern
Mississippi Federal Court District at
Biloxi issued the order for McDow
ell’s enrollment. It was a temporary
restraining order against denial of his
admission.
McDowell graduated from Jackson
State College May 27 with grades rang
ing from “A’s” to “B’s”, was born at
Drew which is in the resident country
of U.S. Sen. James O. Eastland (D.
Miss.) chairman of the Senate Judiciary
Committee.
Applied on May 14
McDowell’s submission of his appli
cation for admission to the School of
Law on May 14, along with the ap
proval of it May 22 by the director of
admissions of the school, and the or
der of the board of trustees May 24 to
defer action on it, were not made pub
lic until the issue was set for hearing
before Judge Mize.
In contesting the preliminary injunc
tion, the college board asked that the
issue be delayed until the federal court
“had properly interpreted to the board
the injunctive order of Sept. 13, 1962,
in the Meredith case.” The board
asked for clarification of “unproven
‘class action’ features” in the Meredith
case.
In its request for a delay pending
interpretation of the ‘class action’
auestion, the board contended that
“Meredith has continuously made an
issue of his race and became as en
grossed in his publicity campaign and
press conferences during the first se
mester of attendance that he barely
received sufficient academic credits to
continue his studies.”
“He has thoroughly demonstrated in
his activities and attitude since his
admission to the university that his
purpose was integration and not edu
cation,” the board asserted. “His en
forced presence on the campus in this
atmosphere has been destructive of
educational opportunities for all stu
dents.”
The board declared that when Judge
Mize first denied Meredith’s applica
tion for admission, the board’s turn
down was not because of his race.
Greene Case
Without naming the student, but
obviously referring to Dewey Greene
of Greenwood, the board’s petition as
serted that “since Meredith’s admission
an unqualified person who claims to be
a Negro has brought litigation in the
courts of the United States contesting
the registrar’s refusal of admission to
him on the basis that this court’s in
junction order (in the Meredith case)
granted relief to him.”
Greene was ordered by the U. S.
Fifth Court of Appeals to go through
regular admission channels before fil
ing court action. He was advised to
appeal the registrar’s rejection to the
university’s Board of Admissions.
In McDowell’s petition, filed by Mrs.
Constance Baker Motley, Jack Green
berg and Derrick A. Bell Jr., counsel
for the Legal Education Fund of the
National Association for the Advance
ment of Colored People, he stated:
“The attached letter (showing the
action of the School of Law’s admission
officer that McDowell is qualified for
admission but action has been ordered
deferred (by the board of trustees) on
his application solely because of his
lace and color.”
Claims ‘Class Action’
His petition states that “this is a
class action brought by the plaintiff
on behalf of himself and on behalf of
all other Negro students in the state
of Mississippi who are similarly situ
ated and affected by the policy, prac
tice, custom and usage complained of
in this action.”
“Plaintiff (McDowell) and members
of his class are Negro citizens of the
United States and of the state of Mis
sissippi, presently residing in Missis
sippi, who, by reason of their prior
requisite education and citizenship
Order, Enrolls in Ole
Miss School of Law
Mississippi Highlights
A second student won a court
order for enrollment in the Univer
sity of Mississippi and entered on
June 5 without incident.
A Justice Department suit seeking
desegregation of the “impacted”
Gulfport Municipal Separate School
District has been dismissed by U.S.
District Judge Sidney C. Mize on
grounds that the federal government
“has no cause of action and no stand
ing as a plaintiff . . .”
Removal of troops from the Uni
versity of Mississippi campus was
requested in a suit filed by State At
torney General Joe T. Patterson at
Oxford.
The Associated Press news wire
service reported on May 16 that a
survey at Ole Miss had revealed
resignations of 35 professors largely
because of “the continuing effects”
of last fall’s desegregation crisis.
Mrs. Wallis I. Schutt, chairman of
the Mississippi State Advisory Com
mittee to the U.S. Civil Rights Com
mission, urged continuance of the
federal commission during an ap
pearance before a Senate committee
in Washington.
status have a right to apply for admis
sion to, and be admitted to the Uni
versity of Mississippi, and all other
state institutions of higher learning
under the jurisdiction, management
and control of defendants (board of
trustees), presently limited to white
students, upon the same terms and
conditions applicable to white citizens
similarly situated,” the bill of com
plaint stated.
“The members of the class are too
numerous to be brought individually
before this court, and are not all
known to the plaintiff, but there are
common questions of law and fact in
volved, common grievances arising out
of common wrongs, and a common re
lief is sought for this plaintiff and for
all other members of the class.
“Plaintiff fairly and adequately rep
resents the members of the class in
behalf of whom he sues.”
Notes Brief Time
Pointing out that the summer ses
sion was to begin June 5, Judge Mize
said “time is of essence of the relief
sought by the plaintiff’ in issuing his
order for McDowell’s admission.
Judge Mize stated further that it
appears “without dispute that plaintiff
is qualified for admission and has been
recommended for admission by the
Dean of Admissions of the School of
Law.”
“It is ordered that the defendants
and each of them, their agents, em
ployes, successors and all persons in
active concert and participation with
them be, and they hereby are, en
joined:
“1. From denying or postponing the
admission of Cleve McDowell to the
Law School of the University of Mis
sissippi.
“2. From refusing to admit him to
the Law School of the University of
Mississippi for the first summer ses
sion commencing on or about June 5.
“3. From refusing to permit him to
attend classes; from refusing to give
him housing on the campus of the
University of Mississippi.
“4. From refusing to give him any
other right, privilege or immunity ac
corded any other student in the Law
School to which he may be entitled.
“5. From discriminating in any way
against him because of his race or
color.”
Seeks Housing
At the same time, Judge Mize de
layed action on a petition of Meredith
which would require university
authorities to “provide him and his
family with university housing for the
summer sessions beginning June 5.”
The petition stated that Meredith’s
application for family housing had
been denied “on grounds inconsistent
with plaintiff’s rights under the Sept.
13, 1962, court orders and the court
of appeals ruling requiring that plain
tiff be admitted upon the same terms
and conditions applicable to white stu
dents.”
Legal Action
Mize Dismisses
Impaet-Area Suit
Involving Gulfport
Judge Sidney C. Mize of the South
ern Mississippi Federal Court district
dismissed on May 16 a Justice Depart
ment suit for desegregation of the
public schools in the “impacted” Gulf
port Municipal Separate School Dis
trict.
The dismissal was based on grounds
that “the United States has no cause
of action and no standing as a plain
tiff in this court to enforce any rights
under the Fourteenth Amendment to
the Constitution.”
Judge Mize held that “only natural
persons are entitled to the privileges
and immunities of the Fourteenth
Amendment and the United States is
not a ‘person’ nor ‘within the jurisdic
tion’ of a state under the terms and
provisions thereof.”
“It is the individual who is entitled
to the equal protection of the law,”
Mize continued, “nor can the United
States of America sue for the depri
vation of civil rights of others; only
persons actually deprived of their in
dividual civil rights can redress such
rights.”
“Furthermore,” the court continued,
“the power to enforce the Fourteenth
Amendment to the Constitution is
specifically vested in Congress, Sec
tion 5 thereof providing: ‘The Con
gress shall have the power to enforce,
by appropriate legislation, the pro
visions of this article.’ ”
The judge asserted that “Congress
has never granted to the Executive
Branch of the government any power
or right to enforce the provisions of
the Fourteenth Amendment.” He de
clared that “the legislative history of
the Civil Rights Acts clearly reflects
that the failure to grant to the United
States the power to bring civil rights
actions was deliberate on the part of
Congress.”
Judge Mize’s decision was handed
down at Gulfport on May 16 in a case
filed by the federal government. The
suit sought to enjoin the school board
from separating upon the basis of race
or color any dependents of military
personnel or federal civilian employes
in the public schools of the Gulfport
Municipal Separate School District in
Harrison county.
An appeal to the U.S. Fifth Circuit
Court of Appeals in New Orleans is
planned.
In the original suit, the Biloxi
school district also was named, but
Judge Mize granted a separation of
the cases and called the Gulfport issue
to trial.
Approximately 2,000 children of
military personnel at Keesler Air Force
Base and government employes at two
veterans hospitals attend the Gulfport
district schools. Of this total, 130 are
Negroes.
Since 1950, the U.S. Commissioner
of Education has paid to the district
under the “impacted area” statute a
total of $1,098,370 for maintenance and
operation of the schools and an addi
tional $1,240,478 for construction and
improvement of facilities.
In accepting the federal funds, the
school district gave written assurances,
as required by the U.S. Code, that
school facilities “will be available to
the children for whose education con
tributions are provided ... on the
same terms, in accordance with the
laws of the state in which applicant is
situated, as they are available to other
children in applicant’s school district.”
Segregation Ban Contended
The Justice Department contended
that these assurances barred segrega
tion of the children for whom it sought
relief.
On the government’s argument that
if assurances given by the school board
authorize separation of the races in the
schools they are unconstitutional,
Judge Mize said “the Constitution does
not compel or require mixing of the
races.”
“Nor if the assurances were uncon
stitutional and void would it follow
that plaintiff here could enforce any
contractual rights,” Judge Mize said.
“An unconstitutional contract is void
and there exists no contract to be en
forced,” he added.
The judge asserted that “the courts
will not under such circumstances
make a new contract for the parties
and then enforce the contract as made
by the court.” He added:
“The court is of the opinion that the
language of the statutory assurances is
unambiguous and that there is no need
for the application of any rules of
construction; that the assurances mere
ly provide that the defendants will
treat the children of military person
nel or civilian employes of the United
States government in exactly the same
manner as other children in the dis
trict are treated, i.e. identical treat
ment for federal children and non-
federal children.
“If identical treatment for the white
and colored children of the military
personnel or civilian employes of the
government had been intended as a
part of the assurances given, it would
have been easy for the act requiring
the assurance to have so provided. Its
omission was not an oversight, but was
In the Colleges
Ole Miss Resignation Figures Disagree
An Associated Press story datelined
Oxford, Miss., on May 16 quoted Chan
cellor J. D. Williams of the University
of Mississippi as saying 16 professors
have resigned—four more than the
average year-end turnover.
The AP said, however, a survey by
Ben Thomas, a staff member, “indi
cates that 35 professors either have
quit or their resignations are pend
ing.”
“Many of the departing faculty
members said they are leaving because
of the continuing effects of last fall’s
desegregation crisis—the rioting and
the tumultous after-effects of Negro
James H. Meredith’s enrollment,” the
news wire service reported.
The university’s professorial force—
all faculty members above the rank
of instructors—numbers about 100.
The AP said four faculty members
queried reported that 35 had resigned.
One professor was quoted by the
AP as saying that “of the 35 that are
leaving, I think 21 are going because
of the integration crisis; but, as far as
I can see, it is never the whole story.”
The unidentified professor added:
“Most are going to better paying jobs.
Many would have left in another year
or two.”
Department chairmen listed by the
AP as those who have resigned in
cluded Dr. William H. Willis, classical
civilization (Greek and Latin); Dr.
Samuel F. Clark, chemistry, and Dr.
Quinter M. Lyon, philosophy. All
joined the faculty in 1946.
The AP story said the College of
Liberal Arts is the hardest hit with'
24 departures. Departments mostly af
fected were said to be the classics,
chemistry and art.
More Resignations Predicted
One identified professor was quoted
as saying:
“There will be resignations from the
faculty connected to the integration
crisis for several more years. Some of
us feel we are better off to wait until
next year to leave.”
Another faculty member who has left
the university is G. Ray Kerciu, a 29-
year-old assistant art professor who
became involved in a controversy over
five modernistic paintings he displayed
in April. Kerciu, who reportedly
joined the faculty for only one year,
used the Confederate Flag as a back
ground for the paintings which depict
ed his impressions of the Ole Miss
desegregation crisis last fall.
In another development at Ole Miss,
Sophomore John P. Little, Jr., of New
Orleans, was placed on a year’s proba
tion for insulting three soldiers sta
tioned on the campus. Little is the son
of an attorney for Tulane University
in a recent racial controversy.
Little was found guilty by the Stu
dent Judicial Council, headed by
Champ Temey of Greenville, a son-in-
law of Senator James O. Eastland. Ter-
ney said the soldiers claimed that
Little addressed them in obscene lan
guage and once attempted to run them
off a highway in his car.
The chairman said a faculty mem
ber’s wife testified before the council
that she heard Little make obscene
remarks to the soldiers.
''HOW.LOOK-THIS GOIHUP IMTO MOUTH ALABAMA AHtc,
HANGS WITH KEUNEW ISMT GOMNA GET US ANywJj-
,,(***,
Graham, Arkansas Gazette (Little Roc<
intentional.
“All children attending schools fc
the defendant’s district are admitted ot
the same terms, i.e. all white children
without exception are alleged to go to
white schools and all colored childrn
without exception are alleged to go to
schools reserved for the Negro race.”
Judge Mize said that “the acts unde
which the assurances were given spe-
cifically provide that no agency or de
partment or officer or employe of the
United States shall exercise any direc
tion, supervision or control over the
personnel, curriculum or program of
instruction of any school in the dis
trict.”
“This court can only enforce con
tracts as written and will never make
contracts for the parties and then en
force them,” he said. “It is competent
for parties to contract that their agree
ment will be governed by the laws of
any designated state.
No Implied Terms
“Plaintiff cannot urge that there k
an implied agreement that school fa- >
cilities would be available to federa
children on any basis other than that
applicable to other children in the dis
trict. There are no implied terms in
any contract where the subject matter
is unambiguously covered.”
Stating that “this construction of the
assurances is in conformity with the
history of the legislation and the exec
utive and administrative interpretations
thereof,” Judge Mize said:
“The administration of both chapters
13 and 19 of title 20, United State
Code, is delegated to the commissions'
of education. Financial assistance has
been granted by the commissioner, an-
funds have been allocated for schoo
construction by the commissioner wit
full knowledge of how the schools ■>-
the district were operated, and sai * 1 * * * 5
funds have been thus granted ana 1
located consistently since the 1954 c
cision in Brown v. Board of Educa
tion ... I
“In 1958 and again in 1962 an eff°
was made to amend these acts so ass
specifically provide that the assuran
must provide that the applying scj>
districts would offer the same sen
facilities to all federal children
gardless of race.
“In each instance the amendm®
"'ee defeated. During the hearing ^
fore the subcommittee, on Aprh
1962, on H.R. 10056, Mr. Burke » ■
shall, as assistant attorney £ e '
stated: “. . . The apparent confU
sional purpose was to proviae ^
funds for the education of c ^.-^
our military forces and related ci
even though the educational faci
used were racially segregated.
“Congress refused to enact „
10056, which provided that the
cant should give ‘assurance . ^pols
agency will operate its public s ^
and admit thereto on a racia y
discriminatory basis.’ ^
“The court therefore concludes ^ ,
neither under the clear langu
the statute nor the executive
struction thereof nor the congr
(See NEGRO, Page U)
Survey
(Continued from Page 1) .
all was for the 1961-62 f c h°c -
ntucky reported an m cr ,
Negroes in biracial classes,
Texas 300, Deleware 38 an
i 2. Dropouts reduced tn^
i by 22 in North Carolina,! r _
ie and 3 in Arkansas, trie*
;es in some of their
itistics obtained for the of-
ilment table were based
mt official records or on » & po-
5 estimates. Some states ye* r J
gathered final totals tor n ts c "'
■s do not record enroll