Newspaper Page Text
PAGE 2—AUGUST, 1963—SOUTHERN SCHOOL NEWS
SOUTH CAROLINA
University Agrees to Admit Qualified Negroes
(Continued From Page 1)
more from the College of Notre Dame
for Women in Baltimore.
Suit against the university was
brought in her name last October and
she was ordered admitted by U.S. Dis
trict Judge J. Robert Martin on July
10. He also agreed to “class action”
aspects of the suit.
Appeal Vetoed
It was after Judge Martin denied a
university request for a reconsideration
of this order that the board of trus
tees voted not to
appeal and to ad
mit qualified ap
plicants without
regard to race.
On July 25, An
derson’s mother
told the press that
her son had ap
plied to USC. The
university regis
trar, Rollin E.
Godfrey, confirm
ed that Anderson’s
MARTIN
application was being processed.
Attorney General Daniel R. McLeod
said Anderson “is covered by the
order” in the Monteith case and that
there was “apparently no recourse” if
he was qualified.
Last year Anderson was a sopho
more, majoring in political science, at
Clark University in Atlanta. He has
been employed this summer with the
Department of Interior in Washington,
D.C.
Anderson had a lawyer who helped
him prepare his application, but has
been involved in no court action against
the university.
Next, Prof. James L. Solomon Jr., a
mathematics instructor at Morris Col
lege, a private Negro institution in
Sumter, asked to be admitted to the
graduate school to seek a doctorate.
The Atlanta native holds a bachelor’s
degree in chemistry from Morris and
a master’s degree in math from Allen
University, a Negro school in Colum
bia. Solomon took a graduate record
exam at USC July 27. He is married
and the father of three children.
Clemson College President Robert C.
Edwards said July 26 that another Ne
gro had qualified for admission. But
he said Clemson considers applications
“confidential and privileged,” and re
fused to give the applicant’s name.
Gantt, having successfully completed
his first semester’s work at Clemson,
is eligible to return.
Board Statement
After its meeting July 29, the Uni
versity of South Carolina’s board,
through Chairman Rutledge L. Os
borne of Orangeburg, released a state
ment, which said in part:
“. . . The state today is experienc
ing a tremendous economic and indus
trial expansion . . . The continuation
of its educational program is essential
to the economical, political and social
well-being of the entire state.
“. . . In the interest of the preserva
tion of the dignity of the orderly proc
esses of education at the University of
South Carolina, the Board of Trustees
is forced to direct compliance with the
order of Judge Martin, unless it is
lawfully modified or rescinded.
“The students of the university, to
gether with their parents, the faculty,
the administrative staff, and the people
of this great state, must jpieet in a
manner which will reflect only the
highest credit on the intellectual in
tegrity of our university and the dig
nity of our state. The Board of Trus
tees will not condone or tolerate any
disturbances which tend to disrupt the
intellectual and educational life of the
university, nor will it permit the uni
versity to be exploited by special in
terest groups. It stands firmly behind
the president of the university (Dr.
Thomas Jones) . . . and intends that
all necessary measures be taken to in
sure that disturbances and disorder be
prevented.
“The full cooperation of the students,
faculty, and administration ... in its
determination to maintain law and or
der on the campus ... it expected by
the board . . .”
Gov. Donald S. Russell, who, as one
of his first acts in office last January,
implemented plans to maintain peace
South Carolina Highlights
The University of South Carolina
under U.S. District Court order to
admit a Negro girl in September, said
it would comply, and would not tole
rate violence.
Mrs. Rebecca Monteith, school
teacher mother of the plaintiff in the
USC desegregation suit, said Ne
groes are partly to blame for their
schools not comparing favorably with
those for whites.
NAACP Executive Secretary Roy
Wilkins told a Charleston audience
that Negroes would return to the
South in large numbers if assured
social equality.
Charleston’s School District 20,
arguing against a desegregation suit,
said a verdict against the district
would “virtually destroy” the city’s
system of education.
Approximately $347,000 in educa
tional television funds was reported
withheld at the request of the
NAACP.
at Clemson during Gantt’s matricula
tion, said, “The people of the state will
preserve law and order. We have dem
onstrated that in the past and will do
so in the future.”
Gov. Russell is a former president of
the university.
Judge Martin’s order had brought no
protest from state and USC officials.
Most said it had been expected.
Action Swift
Legal developments in the Monteith
case came swiftly during July. On July
1 attorneys for the university and Miss
Monteith filed written briefs in U.S.
District Court. They generally followed
the lines of argument presented orally
before Judge Martin June 21 when
USC stipulated that it had denied ad
mission to Miss Monteith in 1962 be
cause of race.
The university’s brief, prepared by
Attorney General McLeod, his assist
ant James S. Verner, and Columbia at
torney David W. Robinson, insisted the
girl had no case against the university
for the term beginning in September,
1963, because she had not applied for
mally.
After her rejection in 1962, the brief
suggested, Miss Monteith could have
followed other courses rather than en
tering the College of Notre Dame for
Women. She could have, it said, asked
USC’s board of trustees to reverse the
decision of the admissions director or
sued then for injunctive relief.
The brief noted that she wanted to go
back to Notre Dame and intended to do
so.
“Apparently she treats the denial of
her 1962 application as eliminating the
necessity for filing a 1963 application
and transcript. Much has happened in
this field since May, 1962,” the brief
continued.
The university contended it was en
titled to dismissal of the action be
cause of her failure to reapply and
went on to say that “since Henri Mon
teith is entitled to no relief, none is
available to a class.”
Negro lawyer Matthew J. Perry, ar
guing for the plaintiff, stressed the
class action portions of the complaint
in his brief.
Plaintiff Upheld
Judge Martin’s order, filed on July
10, upheld both of the plaintiff’s prin
cipal points.
He ruled that she must be admitted
to USC “at the opening of the next
semester” if she complies with all of
the procedures of admission and said
she must be treated “as would any
other student in her same category.”
Additionally, he held the case to be
a class action, applying to other Ne
groes “similarly situated.”
The South Carolina jurist, who re
ceived his law degree at Washington
and Lee University in Virginia and
who was a state circuit judge before
his appointment to the federal bench,
cited as one precedent the Fourth Cir
cuit Court of Appeals’ ruling in the
Gantt v. Clemson College case which
cleared the way for the admission of
Gantt to Clemson last January.
On July 19, the university petitioned
the court to rehear and reconsider its
July 10 order and to deny Miss Mon
teith injunctive relief on the grounds
that she had failed “to unequivocally
apply for admission.”
The university noted again that Miss
Monteith had testified on June 20 that
she had not applied this year for ad
mission to USC in September but had
reapplied to Notre Dame.
It said her testimony “raised serious
doubts as to whether she expected to
apply to the university . . ■” The pe
tition stated that USC had furnished
her with the necessary transfer and
application papers on July 11 at her
request and said it had received a
transcript of her record at Notre Dame.
The university said it had not re
ceived her application subsequently
and pointed out that statements at
tributed to her “indicate that it is ex
tremely doubtful that she will seek
admission to the university in Septem
ber.”
State’s Contention
It contended that “the courts of the
United States should not interfere with
the administration of a state institution
except under conditions not here pres
ent.”
The petition indicated that the uni
versity hoped to stay the class-action
aspects of the case until the U. S. Su
preme Court rules on a Clemson ap
peal in the Gantt case. The petition
noted that the Supreme Court was in
recess and that the Clemson appeal
may not be acted on until October.
The university’s expressed doubts
that Miss Monteith would apply to
USC apparently were based on state
ments in the press attributed to the
girl and to her mother, Mrs. Re
becca Monteith.
When Judge Martin’s order was an
nounced, Miss Monteith issued a brief
statement which expressed her delight
and added, “. . . Since it is a class ac
tion, I hope many Negro youths will
avail themselves of the opportunity to
attend any tax-supported institution in
South Carolina.”
A day later, an article in the Balti
more Evening Sun quoted the 18-year-
old premedical student as saying she
probably would return to the Catholic
school there for her sophomore year.
The article noted that she had en
joyed her year at Notre Dame and
that she had a working assistantship
(in the student personnel office) and
several scholarships there.
Registration Cited
Her mother told the Baltimore re
porter that no such arrangements had
been made at USC and noted that fi
nances was one matter she had to con
sider. She mentioned that her daughter
had pre-registered at Notre Dame be
fore leaving the campus in June.
“We stand to forfeit $105 in deposits
and face having to repay a $100 grant
from the school (Notre Dame) if Henri
doesn’t complete her studies at Notre
Dame,” the girl’s mother said, adding
that she had enrolled her daughter for
another year at Notre Dame because
she was not sure the federal courts
would decide in favor of entrance to
USC. “Nobody with any common sense
What They Say
would have waited,” she said.
The university’s petition for a re
hearing was denied on July 22 by
Judge Martin.
Then Mrs. Monteith announced that
she had left the choice of school up to
her daughter and that Henri had de
cided on USC.
“Negroes cannot rise alone,” she said.
“We must rise as a race, and we feel
Henri’s entering the university will
open the door to all Negroes getting a
good education.”
Explains Delay
Delay in applying, she said, resulted
from the family’s efforts to work out
its financial problems.
Originally, Miss Monteith had said
she planned to be a day student. (She
lives within 10 miles of the campus on
a small farm off U.S. Highway No. 1.)
“Since then, our attorney (Perry)
told us he was advised by the State
Attorney General’s office that it would
be safer from a security standpoint for
Henri to live on the campus.”
The prospect of dormitory fees and
board bills further dented “an already
strained budget,” Mrs. Monteith said.
Legal Action
Charleston Says
White Students’
Schools Periled
In answering a desegregation suit
filed more than a year ago, Charleston
Comity’s School District 20—peninsular
Charleston—argued that a verdict in
favor of the 13 Negro plaintiffs would
“virtually destroy” the city’s system of
education for white students.
The case was to be heard before U.S.
District Judge J. Robert Martin, sitting
in Columbia, Aug. 5.
The school trustees argued further
that there would be no corresponding
benefit to the academic progress of Ne
gro children.
The case in question is Brown v.
School District 20 of Charleston
County, filed in U.S. District Court
at Charleston May 28, 1962.
It is one of three public school de
segregation suits on the court’s docket.
The others are Brunson et al v. Board
of Trustees of School District No. 1 of
Clarendon County, filed in April, 1960,
and Stanley et al v. Darlington County
School District No. 1, filed May 29,
1962.
After a hearing of the Clarendon
case in the summer of 1962 before U.S.
District Judge C.C. Wyche, the Negro
plaintiffs appealed a ruling by Judge
Wyche that the case could not be
brought as a class action. The Fourth
James L. Solomon Jr.
Seeking a doctorate.
Circuit Court of Appeals subsequently
considered the appeal and ruled against
Judge Wyche.
The Aug. 5 hearing was to be the first
desegregation case brought before the
overloaded and understaffed (there are
two federal court vacancies in the
state) District Court since this ruling.
Trustees’ Answer
The trustees, in their answer, al
leged the Negroes did not follow to
completion procedures established by
the state to handle such grievances.
Because of this, they contend, the case
has no standing in federal court.
The answer explained that the re
quests for transfer of five of the stu
dents were rejected after investigation
by a special committee of the school
board because it was felt that the in
terests of the children could be served
best by their remaining in their former
educational environments.
(In their complaint, the Negroes con
tended that they had exhausted all ad
ministrative remedies.)
The trustees said that standard in
telligence tests showed that the men
tal ages of Negroes were from two to
four years below those of similarly
aged white children. Because of this,
the answer said, the mixing of races
in Charleston schools would be unfor
tunate.
The board contended that certain
social, moral and behavioral differences
between the two races constitute a ra
tional basis for segregation in ite
schools, particularly among young an
immature children.
The lead plaintiff in the case is the
daughter of J. Arthur Brown, South
Carolina NAACP president.
On July 29, the parents of six white
students in Charleston’s School Dis
trict 20 petitioned the District Court
(See SOUTH CAROLINA, Page 15)
Mrs. Monteith Hits Negro Actions
Mrs. Rebecca Monteith, mother of
Henri Monteith, 18-year-old Negro
girl ordered admitted to the all-white
University of South Carolina, said July
23 that Negroes themselves are partly
to blame for the fact that Negro schools
in the state do not compare favorably
with white schools.
The Columbia school teacher made
the statement after being criticized by
members of her race for a previous
statement in which she suggested that
Allen University and Benedict College,
two private, church-supported Negro
colleges in Columbia, were “two-bit
schools.”
On the day after U. S. District Judge
J. Robert Martin ordered the state
university at Columbia to admit her
daughter in September, Mrs. Monteith
was quoted in the press as saying that
Henri would not attend “Allen or Ben
edict or any two-bit school.”
This brought a sharp retort in the
form of a letter to the editor of the
Columbia State from M. I. Evans, Al
len’s athletic coach.
Said Coach Evans: “It is inconceiva
ble to me that anyone who knows any
thing about the contributions of pri
vate colleges, particularly Allen Uni
versity and Benedict College, would
ever imply that these institutions are
two-bit schools.’ ”
Graduates Cited
He said the two colleges have been
responsible, over the years, for edu
cating thousands of successful gradu
ates.
Coach Evans pointed out that Mrs.
Monteith’s son Richard was, at the
time of her statement, attending the
combined Alien-Benedict summer
school and was a regular student at
Benedict.
“It would seem to me that these
‘two-bit schools’ are good enough for
at least part of the family,” he said.
The coach added that he thought it
was the prerogative of the individual,
as well as a constitutional right, to
seek entrance to any institution he or
she wished, but not anyone’s right to
imply that these or any other “simi
larly situated” schools are “two-bit
schools.”
Mrs. Monteith’s Reply
Mrs. Monteith, after waiting a week
to reply, said:
“I do not fear to maintain that the
college graduates of today from some
of the aforementioned (Negro) schools
. . . would not compare favorably with
graduates of many top-ranking white
high schools in South Carolina, not to
mention across the United States.”
Saying Negroes must share the
blame, Mrs. Monteith said, “We have
failed to inculcate learning in many
instances.
“We have not been fully dedicated.
We have not inspired our youth to the
limit . . .”
She suggested that many Negroes
have been hindered “from doing our
best work” by other Negroes in posi
tions of authority.
“My people have been the victims of
deliberate miseducation and deliberate
denial of adequate educational oppor
tunity by the very public officials who
were supposed to provide this ‘sepa
rate but equal’ education.
“My people will show the detri
mental effects of this historical farce
for years. In the meantime, those
perpetrated this ‘great steal are (0
blaming Negroes for not being a
meet the demands of the day.
Mrs. Monteith called for a , ing
all persons “who are wilfully s
in the way of progress.”
Negroes Seen
Returning South
ibe^ 1
If Equality Won
Negroes will return in large nU js
from the North if social equ
achieved in the South, NAAC ^ a
tive Secretary Roy Wilkins ^
Charleston press conference J u r to
“The Negro must pay a high P,
live in the ghettos of the No
kins said, “but at least he tee i et :
Other comments by the Negro
• South Carolina is not a ^
core” segregationist state, bu
“soft core” either. , 0°
• There is, to his knowledge ^
organized effort in the state o jfe-
Negro from voting. “It s up ° ^gjstef
gro citizen to come forwar ,
and vote.” , „; P ws 00
• Sen. Barry Goldwaters v* ^ a
civil rights are not “accep a e no u ^
large number of people arg
to keep him from getting j, e Kf
office in the land . - • He let 1
lieves that civil rights sho , t be-
up to the individual state. r^uis 1 '
lieve that states like MississipP ■ C3f o'
ana, and Florida—or ev«\ _ pefN'..
lina—should be left to thei
liar interpretation of the