Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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