Newspaper Page Text
PAGE 16—FEBRUARY, 1964-SOUTHERN SCHOOL NEWS
Florida
(Continued From Page 1)
No comment had come at the end of
January from
school officials in
Volusia or Hills
borough counties,
which are indi
rectly affected.
Attorneys for
those school
boards are study
ing the decision.
Unofficial opinion
is that a start to
ward teacher de
segregation must
be made if the schools wish to avoid
further litigation, the outcome of
which appears certain.
Dade County has the only “fully
desegregated” school system in Florida,
with a number of white teachers in
predominantly Negro schools and some
Negroes teaching mixed classes. No
figure has been made public but school
officials said teacher desegregation is
“sizable” and increasing.
Sees ‘Clear’ Answer
In its majority opinion, the appeals
court said the question to be settled,
“stated in general terms,” was whether
the 1954 school desegregation decision
of the Supreme Court “or other
authoritative decisions of that or this
court, authorize an order by a trial
court, once it has found the existence
of a dual system of schools operated
on a racially segregated basis, to in
clude in its order seeking to remedy
such a situation a prohibition against
the assignment of teachers and other
personnel on a racial basis and to pro
hibit the financing and physical ar
rangement of schools on a racial basis.
We think the answer to this question
is clear ...”
The opinion then cited the Supreme
Court’s holding in 1955 as to allowing
time for compliance with desegregation
requirements. It said that in deciding
how much time is necessary, “the courts
may consider problems related to ad
ministration, arising from the physical
condition of the school plant, the
school transportation system, personnel,
revision of school districts and atten
dance areas into compact units to
achieve a system of determining admis
sion to the public schools on a non-
racial basis.”
After negating the contention by
school officials that no court previously
had required elimination of teacher
assignment by race or planning opera
tions otherwise to avoid desegregation,
the opinion said no appellate court had
held, on the other hand, that going into
these subjects is unwarranted under
the Supreme Court’s decision.
Recalling that it had previously
reversed a district court decision
against efforts to require nonracial
assignments of teachers in Escambia
County, the majority said: “We thus
held that it is a matter of proper con
cern in such a suit as the one now
before us that teachers are so assigned
(nonracially).”
More Time for Atlanta
On the other hand, the appeals court
said it exercised the prerogative of
allowing time in the case of Atlanta
schools when it held “that the trial
court did not err in postponing con
sideration of the teacher assignment
question.”
Judge Tuttle wrote:
“Where, however, the court, which
has the first duty with respect to re
quiring action if none is taken intially
by the Board of Education, considers
that in order fully to implement the
Supreme Court’s decision it will be
necessary to put an end to the assign
ment of teachers and other personnel
by race to the schools within the
Board’s jurisdiction, we think it can
not conceivably be said that such an
order goes beyond the permissible
range of the trial court’s choice of
means to put an end to the operation
of schools on a racially segregated
basis. The same, of course, is true with
respect to the requirements that the
plan called for by the injunctive order
make provision for putting into effect
an end of approving budgets, making
funds available, approving employment
contracts and construction programs,
and approving policies, curricla and
programs designed to perpetuate, main
tain or support a school system oper
ated on a racially segregated basis ...”
In conclusion, the opinion said: “The
contested provisions of the decree (as
to personnel and administration) fall
well within the permitted range of
relief that can properly be granted ...”
Judge Jones, in his dissenting opin
ion, said that “by judicial alchemy”
the factual determination of the Su
preme Court against school segregation
“has been transmuted into a rule of
law so that it is now conclusively pre
sumed that racial segregation of pupils
is detrimental to them and denied to
KENT
Florida Highlights
The Duval County (Jacksonville)
school board was ordered to end im
mediately the assignment of teachers
on a racial basis. The ruling by the
U.S. Fifth Court of Appeals opens
a new phase of school desegregation
in Florida.
Dade County school officials say
at least three of the system’s five
Negro high school will be “phased
out” by transfer of students to pre
dominantly white school.
them a constitutionally guaranteed
light.”
But Jones said “it should be kept in
mind ... that the principles of law
declared in Brown (the 1954 case)
were dependent upon the actual finding
of injury to pupils.” Noting that the
Negro children for whom the Duval
County case was filed had claimed
“they and members of their class” were
injured by racial assignment of school
personnel, the dissenting judge said:
“There was no proof made of the
injury and no finding by the court that
the policy of assigning Negro personnel
to Negro schools and white personnel
to white schools has a detrimental
effect upon Negro children. No such
finding of fact has been made in any
other case, so far as I am aware.”
Judge Jones declared that “Brown
dealt with pupil segregation, not with
assignments of school personnel.” He
said the high court’s comments are
to be applied to cases involving admis
sions to public schools, and he took
the position that only pupils are “ad
mitted”—not teachers, principals and
administrative personnel.
“It does not follow,” he concluded,
“that because injury to Negro children
will be presumed from racial segrega
tion of pupils in public schools, proof
need not be made of the factual allega
tion that injury to Negro children as
a class is caused by racial segregation
of school personnel.”
Schoolmen
Dade County
To Phase Out
Negro Schools
At least three of Dade County’s five
Negro high schools will be phased out
in the next few years. Supt. Joe Hall
told the school board Jan. 29 that it
was not economically feasible to con
tinue their operation with dwindling
student bodies caused by geographical
shifts.
Long-range plans call for transfer
of students now attending these schools
to predominantly white schools, already
in operation or planned for the future.
Several thousand children are involved.
First scheduled to close its doors
will be the George Washington Carver
Senior High, one of the city’s oldest.
It now has only 450 students in grades
10-12. Dr. Hall said school studies indi
cate a 2,600-3,200 student load is the
best for educational and fiscal efficiency.
“It is hard to justify operating a
senior high with a load as small as
Carver’s,” he said.
Draw Whites
Part of the Carver High student
body will be transferred to the new
Killian Senior High when it begins
operation in 1965. Killian will also
draw off several white students from
Coral Gables Senior High, making
room there for the remaining Negroes
now at Carver.
Two other Negro high schools, North
Dade and Mays, may undergo a similar
process later. Attendance at both is
below the minimum set as a standard
but other facilities do not exist for these
students as yet.
When the process is complete, how
ever, only two predominantly Negro
high schools will remain. Both serve
large, well-established Negro areas
and no change seems likely in the fore
seeable future.
★ ★ ★
A plan to upgrade education in Negro
schools where tests show comparatively
low achievement levels has been pro
posed to the Dade County school board.
Jack D. Gordon, board member, sug
gested that 100 special teaching fellow
ships be established for young college
graduates who will agree to serve at
least a year in those schools.
These apprentice teachers not only
would assist regular teachers in the
classrooms but also would go into the
homes to work with parents and give
special help on an individual basis.
They also would have responsibility
for off-hour recreation activities.
7 Decisions Involve Faculties
(Continued From Page 1)
July, 1963, in Dowell v. Board of Edu
cation.
When Judge Simpson delivered his
original desegregation order in the Du
val County suit on Aug. 21, 1962, he
also issued similar orders in two other
school suits. In Tillman et al v. Board
of Public Instruction of Volusia Coun
ty (Daytona Beach), the judge ordered
the board to include teachers in a
complete desegregation plan to be sub
mitted to the court. The district, which
already had begun student desegrega
tion, provided a plan to extend class
room desegregation but requested more
time in acting on the teacher issue.
Judge Simpson, in his desegregation
order in Mannings et al v. Board of
Public Instruction of Hillsborough
County (Tampa), noted that teacher
desegregation had not been an issue
in the original petition, but granted
permission for the plaintiffs to file an
amendment to include this.
The issue of teacher desegregation in
school suits generally includes a call
for an order to forbid school boards
from “approving budgets, making funds
available, approving employment con
tracts and construction programs, and
approving policies to perpetuate,
maintain or support a school system
operated on a racially segregated
basis,” as in the Duval County peti
tion.
The legal arguments on the issue of
teacher desegregation involve two
questions concerning the original U.S.
Supreme Court rulings in the School
Segregation Cases and subsequent re
lated decisions:
• Did these decisions specifically
authorize the courts to concern them
selves with the teacher issue?
• Are Negro children injured by a
policy of assigning teachers and other
school personnel on the basis of race,
thus bringing the teacher issue under
the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th
Amendment?
Nonracial Basis
In the Duval County case, Judge
Simpson held that the Negro children
and their parents possessed the right,
under the 14th Amendment, to have
personnel assigned and the system
operated on a nonracial basis.
Judge Simpson wrote:
“There may be no determinations
based upon race or color, in whole or
part, with respect to the operation of
the public school system, or any of its
components. The Brown case is mis
read and misapplied when it is con
strued simply to confer upon Negro
pupils the right to be considered for
admission to a “white’ school.”
In affirming Judge Simpson’s ruling,
the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals de
cision, delivered by Chief Judge E. P.
Tuttle, quoted from the U.S. Supreme
Court’s implementing decision of 1955:
“... the courts may consider prob
lems related to administration, arising
from the physical condition of the
school plant, the school transportation
system, personnel, revision of school
districts and attendance areas into
compact units to achieve a system of
determining admission to the public
schools on a nonracial basis.” The cir
cuit court majority italicized that por
tion for emphasis to support its juris
diction.
Dissenting Opinion
Circuit Judge W. L. Jones dissented
in the Duval County ruling, saying
that the Negro plaintiffs had failed to
make proof of any injury because of
a policy of assigning Negro personnel
to Negro schools. He quoted the same
section from the second Brown deci
sion of the Supreme Court, but itali
cized a different portion to emphasize
the basis of his objections:
. . the courts may consider prob
lems relative to administration, arising
from the physical condition of the
school plant, the school transportation
system, personnel, revision of school
districts and attendance areas into
compact units to achieve a system of
determining admission to the public
schools on a nonracial basis.”
“Brown dealt with pupil segregation,
The recruits would be selected from
applicants in the top quarter of their
classes and have Florida teaching cer
tificates. They would receive $250
monthly.
Gordon said his plan was modeled
on the Peace Corps and would require
persons with dedication to teaching
and a desire to help solve a basic prob
lem in education.
“We must raise all our school stand
ards and achievements if we are to
produce people who can cope with the
unknown problems that lie ahead.”
The school board asked for an admin
istrative study of the plan.
not with assignments of school per
sonnel,” Judge Jones added.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals
has issued rulings on teacher desegre
gation in two other school suits. In
Augustus et al v. Board of Public In
struction of Escambia County (Pen
sacola), U.S. District Judge Harrold
Carswell had stricken that part of the
petition concerning teachers. On June
23, 1960, he had said, in part, that the
Supreme Court rulings concerned only
the segregation of children and that
the decisions had not, even by infer
ence, decided that the assignment of
teachers by race was a violation of
constitutional rights.
On an appeal to the Fifth Circuit
Court, the district court was ordered
to consider on its merits the request
for teacher desegregation. The appel
late court said that the lower court
had erred in striking the issue, but
held that Judge Carswell could use
his discretion in postponing “the con
sideration and determination of that
question until the desegregation of the
pupils has either been accomplished or
has made substantial progress.”
When the Atlanta, Ga., school deseg
regation suit (Calhoun v. Latimer)
came before the Fifth Circuit Court,
the court on June 17, 1963, refused to
order the city’s desegregation plan
speeded. The plan approved by Dis
trict Judge Frank Hooper was for the
period of transition, the appellate court
said, adding:
“Time will tell whether other ques
tions regarding discrimination in the
areas of extra-curricular activities, or
leading from assignment of teacher
personnel are rendered moot . . . The
District Court did not err in postponing
the consideration of teacher assignment
question.”
Oklahoma Case
Oklahoma City, Okla., received an
order to desegregate its students and
personnel from U.S. District Judge
Luther Bohanon on July 11, 1963.
Judge Bohanon said in Dowell v. Board
of Education:
“Inasmuch as the Superintendent of
Schools has established the proof
necessary that Negro teachers are equal
in quality to the white teachers, it
seems only reasonable and fair that in
all schools, mixed or otherwise, the
School Board would and should make
a good faith effort to integrate the
faculty, in order that both white and
Negro students would feel that their
color was represented upon an equal
level and that their people were shar
ing the responsibility of high-level
teaching.”
Bohanon added that that portion of
the Brown decision declaring that the
segregation of Negro children “gener
ates a feeling of inferiority” also ap
plied to a Negro student in a desegre
gated school being denied one of his
own race as his principal and/or
teacher.
Oklahoma City assigned five Negro
teachers to biracial schools at the be
ginning of the fall term, and added
three later in the term (SSN, January)
Kentucky and Tennessee
In the four Kentucky cases in which
teacher desegregation was ordered, the
defendant school boards apparently did
not question the statement of fact that
their students and teachers were as
signed on a racial basis, and the judges
issued orders for them to desegregate
without offering a legal explanation.
The teacher desegregation issue once
was stricken from the Chattanooga
school suit (Mapp et al v. Chattanooga
Board of Education), but later was re
stored by another judge. U.S. District
Judge Leslie Darr granted the de
fendants’ motion to strike teacher de
segregation from the complaint on the
grounds that the teachers, principals
and administrative personnel were not
parties to the suit and that the allega
tions were immaterial. Judge Darr’s
successor, Judge Frank Wilson, re
stored the issue on the same basis that
the Fifth Circuit Court had restored
it to the Escambia County case:
Without passing on the legal questions
involved, the court held that the issues
should be allowed to remain part of
the proceeding, even though it might
never be necessary to consider them.
U.S. District Judge William E. Miller
twice has refused to strike the teacher
issue from Maxwell et al v. County
Board of Education of Davidson Coun
ty. Judge Miller said that the court
“cannot go so far as to agree with the
argument that this question has been
finally settled by the decision in the
Brown cases.” He added:
“But the Court does entertain the
view that this question is a serious
question under the Equal Protection
Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
A very liberal transfer provision for
students, coupled with the assignment
of teachers by race, presents the ques
tion as to whether a segregated public
school system would not be perpetu
ated, the court said. Judge Miller, how
ever, withheld any determination on
the issues.
Virginia
(Continued From Page 15)
The board also approved the transfer
of five Negroes from a predominantly
white to a Negro school in Alexandria.
All of the children involved had
changed residences since schools opened
in September.
Legal Action
Recess Appointment
Places Robinson
On District Court
Spottswood W. Robinson III, who ar
gued the Prince Edward County school
desegregation case before the Supreme
Court a decade ago, was sworn in Jan.
8 as a federal district judge.
Robinson took the oath at the Fed
eral District Courtroom in Richmond,
his home city, but he will serve on the
bench of the U. S.
District Court in
the District of Co
lumbia.
The oath was
administered by
District Judge
John D. Butzner
Jr. at 11:57 a.m.,
three minutes be
fore Congress was
scheduled to con
vene in Washing
ton. By taking of-
ROBINSON
fice before Congress convened, Robin
son can continue in his “recess appoint
ment” until the Senate acts to confirm
or reject the appointment. The annual
salary is $22,500.
Robinson was originally nominated
by President Kennedy on Oct. 1, 1963,
to succeed the late Judge James W.
Morris, who died in 1960. The Senate
failed to act in 1963 before adjourning,
so President Johnson made the recess
appointment just before Congress met
last month.
For three years prior to June,
Robinson was dean of Howard Univer
sity’s Law School. He also served as a
member of the U. S. Civil Rights Com
mission. „
During the 1950’s he represented ne
gro plaintiffs in numerous desegrega
tion suits in Virginia.
★ ★ ★
The U. S. Fourth Circuit Court
Appeals on Jan. 27 ordered the reopen
ing of the Frederick County sehool^
segregation case. (Brown v. Fred
County School Board.) ,
The court, meeting in R iclun ??. ’
overruled District Judge Thomas
chie’s dismissal of the Negroes pe 1 ^
for an injunction against segrega i
high school students in the cOUnt ^,..
“There would seem to be no < ° DS ^ e
cle,” the appeals tribunal said,
entry of an order requiring a
ment of present practices no la et’ *
the opening of the next school } ^
Frederick County has no j 0
school. It sends its Negro studen
a high school in the city of W
and pays their tuition. _ e g a -
Judge Michie had ordered deseg ^
tion at the elementary school 1 g
the county but had refused o -y's
similar order applying to the
high school students.
Attorney Attacks ‘Exile
In a hearing before the Circuit*-^,
on Jan. 20, attorney S. W. T ^ C f, „’ c0 ur‘
resenting the plaintiffs, urge j er jck
to put an end to the "exile o to
County Negro high school chil
Winchester.”
George G. Snarr, Jr., ^' p . p^b-
the county school board, said ^pld
lem could be worked out tty .^on-
sit down and discuss it like
able people.” ,, ojbel 0 *?
But Chief Judge Simon h. leg8 l
remarked that the board a <‘’phe rC
obligation and should ful J „ .