# Amicus Curiae Brief — Brown v. Board of Education > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386408_0043%3A20 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Amicus Curiae Brief - **Published:** January 1, 1954 - **Citation:** 347 U.S. 483 ## Text {HAROLD B. WILLEY, Cler IN THE Supreme Court of the United States Octoser Term, 1954 No... A. O.iver Brown, ET AL., Dororxy EK. Davis, et aL., Appellants, Appellants, v. v. Boarp oF EpucaTion oF County ScHoot Boarp oF Topeka, SHAWNEE CovuNn- Prince Epwarp County, TY, KANSAS, ET AL. VIRGINIA, ET AL. Harry Bnriaes, Jk., ET AL., Frances B. GEBHART, ET AL, Appellants, Petitioners, v. v. R. W. Ex.iort, ET Au. EruHE.t Louise BEuTton, ET AL. AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF FLORIDA Ricnarp W. Ervin Attorney General of the State of Florida State Capitol Building Tallahassee, Florida Ratpex E. Opum Assistant Attorney General State of Florida IN THE Supreme Court of the United States OctosE:i TERM, 1954 Bel icsicetiiinteninee OLIvER Brown, ET AL., Dororuy E. Davis, ET AL., Appellants, Appellants, v. v. Boarp oF EpucaTION OF County ScHoo.t Boarp or Topeka, SHAWNEE CouN- Prince Epwarp County, ty, Kansas, ET AL. VIRGINIA, ET AL. Harry Briges, Jk., ET AL., i'kances B, GEBHART, ET AL., Appellants, Petitioners, v. v. R. W. Exuiort, er au. ETHEL Lovisr BELTON, ET AL. AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF FLORIDA Ricuarp W. Ervin Attorney General of the State of Florida State Capitol Building Tallahassee, Florida Rautpy E. Opum Assistant Attorney General State of Florida Subject Matter Index nt CINE... usieinernenapniyeintonncnieneneennmmionionae: 1 PART ONE A Discussion of the Reasons for a Period of Gradual Adjustment to Desegregation to be Permitted in Florida with Broad Powers of Discretion Vested in Local School Authorities to Determine Administrative Procedures...... 3 A. The Need for Time in Revising the State Legal SUTIN Sos capianibicheaiesatebaianditaegipuntasderianaiociniansaaieanneatets 5 I. Examples of Legislative Problems .................... 7 RR SS Seo eR 7 (b) Powers and Duties of County School IIIT atscestilssesialeneccaiacdcicahisbaeniaianianstbastatiiaietlaaianiasitene 10 (c) State Board of Education and State Super- SUITED siiheilinsacinceslanmitieetintannnsiiitaniaintandninnehitis 12 II. Discussion of Legislative Attitudes .................0 14 B. The Need for Time in Revising Administrative NIE sassiatisduvatiididnstniniensctinicsenialeeniinlesitierinatinieiabistinde 17 Bi SITTIN cso casedicriclesisrnceeneeesidesipeesnnindasinadbeciliaaddonianion 18 a sicchlcisisteasldantlepesoneneiniaiy 18 De IIIT sscircindsrccsieestateeiiaiilouanisansiiestician 19 (c) Scholastic Standards ..0...........cccccccscsssscssssssees 19 (d) Health and Moral Welfare .............c:ccccceses00e 20 C. The Need for Time in Gaining Public Acceptance.. 23 I. A Survey of Leadership Opinion .............cce:e0000 23 IT. General Conclusions ..............ccccccssssessssssesssssssseeees 24 I IIIIIIIIND sicctilsnbissaiiasnentenselntsionanupiiasantesl 32 A Note on Responses of Legislators .............::+0+ 33 Bee Te OR TIONS svtcteccrncintennmenenmne 34 Se: SEINE | siclestisisasnnsiteneenessibceesinenpdiaiecuteneninoraicedintesutiecin 34 BTID TE IEG secesccteitnincercnisianiccisensentoniscenane 41 a INE I SII -ptcnncsdcinisiamsaneioeiiinssiininidanicennsnnsiniecadiaiicane 43 Sa UII a orsiacleeaiisiaidc nu vniliasennenioneiieasoainiie 53 a aia 55 PART TWO Specific Suggestions to the Court in Formulating a ID acaceaiinaniicegeiettsecnenntcictnntnnscctdinseinianinsinanpicemmnmuniiiantinn 57 I asl als ieatcalnigbsiataniiinidimaincs 59 ; Se III ssssssresnsissiaptednetathnnentnieteteniednunieciincsdese 61 PART THREE a : i Legal Authority of the Court to Permit a Period of Gradual Adjustment and Broad Powers of Administra- tive Discretion on the Part of Local School Authorities.. 67 A. Judicial Cases Permitting Time ............cccsceeeeees 69 F I. United States v. American Tobacco Coo. .............. 69 : II. Standard Oil v. United States «cscs 70 3 III. Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co. ........:c:ccccceseeeeees 72 State of Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co., etc..... 72 é IV. State of New York v. State of New Jersey, ete... 75 V. Martin Bldg. Co. v. Imperial Laundry ................ 75 B. Administrative Discretion Cases ...........:.ccccceseseeeeesees 77 I. United States v. Paramount Pictures .................. 77 II. Alabama Public Service Commission v. Southern NIN MPAA siectscrnonsesssisshcaninsniivininisinnensianinsvinneee 78 People of the State of New York v. United TTIIIIT cusiemscinashdtesiapaituanemmatiaaibdebaienisoipeecvusuainiiienie 79 ee Rs GT GE OR. cetintrtectotscttemiceninaitiietene 80 ii BLEED THROUGH Page IV. Far Eastern Conference, United States Lines Co., etc. v. United States and Federal Mari- I BS entecectnctaboniensepnieitonsniannlanevinsinseiinienitinsiin 82 VY. Minersville School District v. Gobitis .................. 82 Fe I Fi Fee Be ccerensonserecrevensserenervenenesionn 83 ie I Oe IID ciipeieprcenesasverenntionnentinesnintiinies 84 VIII. Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. oc cccceeeesseneeeeeee 84 ie BUI Saiedicaercopncichinsebannnineventisnittinenniesiitdteniniticsinninininsaitinailid 85 PART FOUR Considerations Involved in Formulating Plans for IID sitrvncsianienisceisossestiscesubntinanicaeasiniesittiiniasnainthautecstiimiints 87 i I IE sccercetnectnccectitinivicnevemimcntanecsicuminsastibisien 89 PB Eee 91 PART FIVE SUTIUEUIEITTIIEN siscitsiseascsitudidesitsckeninaceeiabiaacededeiniaisnihbiciabiaibiinintitctadsiainaniaii 97 ili Rae a eT Wi ies eokes a | 5 r es £5 ee ee Cee eae Appendix A Page RESULTS OF A SURVEY OF FLORIDA LEADER. SHIP OPINION ON THE EFFECTS OF THE U. §&. SUPREME COURT DECISION OF MAY 17, 1954, RELATING TO SEGREGATION IN FLORIDA EET I A ARR EES. ARE SOOO 99 IID 2 * a ~ a xg ; 5 ‘In quietness and patience, people of culture receive this news, realizing the inevitable has at last come about. They also realize, however, that the absorption into our daily life of this new decision—the putting of it into practice—must represent an organic cul- tural assimilation which, like all social processes, will take time. But eventually the wrongs and mistakes of history are righted and remedied and inhumanities are rectified. .... Let us enter into this integration calmly, with good judgment. Let us give and take, working out together the best possible means we can put into action so that there may be peace and understanding, and, may I say, the spirit of brotherhood. ‘‘There is much for the Negro to do as well as the white. We must use tact and wisdom. It will take conferences, thinking and planning and working side by side. More largely than is realized, we are good, loyal, American citizens. And whether we be north, east, south or west, we shall put forth every effort to meet the requirements of our new status.’’ There is reason to believe that given the opportunity for voluntary local action and sufficient time an effort will be made on the part of educational leaders of both races in Florida to work together to achieve the goal set by the Court. United States Senator Spessard L. Holland of Florida, speaking of desegregation, said in a press interview (Tampa Tribune, August 28, 1954, page 1): ‘We cannot spend ail our time in vain regrets, but rather time must be spent in trying, as apparently the State Cabinet has been doing along with officials and educators of both races at the local level, to learn how to bring it about.”’’ On July 15 and 16, 1954, the Continuing Educational Council of Florida met in Tallahassee to consider the prob- lem of desegregation. This Council is composed of repre- sentatives from virtually all civic, labor, veteran and edu- 44 BLEED THROUGH = — ; es cee cational organizations in the state. Seventy members of the Council were present at the Tallahassee meeting and the future course of Florida schools in the light of the Court’s decision in the Brown case was discussed for two days. At the end of its deliberations the Council adopted the following motion: ‘‘Based on information and reports at this time, the Council joins with the request of the State Cabinet, heretofore made, whereby the Attorney General of Florida take every step necessary to prepare and file a brief which Florida and several other states have been invited to submit when consideration is given this October to the ‘when’ and ‘how’ provisions of the Court’s judgment in the recent decision holding segre- gation unconstitutional. It now appears that this brief should emphasize among other things the following: 1. The maximum time possible should be granted the states affected. 2. Compliance with regard to time should be on a local basis; the time requirement be- cause of mores and conditions will vary within coun- ties of each state. 3. Enforcement provisions of the judgment’s requirements should be left to the Courts of first instance.’’ Additional agreements which were reached by a large majority of the Council in discussion of the Supreme Court decision on segregation were as follows: 1. ‘‘The public school system of Florida should be maintained and improved. Nothing should be done which will destroy these schools or cause them to retro- gress in any way.’’ 2. ‘‘The citizens of Florida will wish to abide by the laws of our nation, but time for necessary adjustments is essential if serious problems are to be avoided.’’ 3. ‘*The problems of adjustment are different in each county and in various communities within each county. Responsibility for solution of these problems rests with the citizens and authorities within these local areas.’’ 45 BLURRED COPY rate rays Ase 7 SOR BE TING 4. “‘A committee from the Continuing Educational Council, with outside representation as well, is to be appointed. Its function is to suggest multiple plans by which desegregation may be implemented. Among the ideas developed would be the suggestion that local groups of white and Negro citizens make careful ap- praisal of existing conditions with the idea of pro- ceeding gradually and in an orderly manner toward compliance with our National Constitution.”’ 5. ‘‘A committee of nine representatives from the Con- tinuing Educational Council is to meet with a repre- sentative group of State Negro leaders for the purpose of developing a joint statement to serve as a guide to both races in working out the problems ahead.’’ On July 30th, 1954, fifty representative Florida Negro leaders met at Edward Waters College in Jacksonville to study the problem of integration of Florida schools. As a result of this meeting a committee of nine was selected to meet with a similar committee of the Continuing Educa- tional Council of Florida for the purpose of studying ways and means of implementing the Supreme Court’s decision in Florida. On September 10, 1954, a committee representing the Continuing Educational Council, and a committee repre- senting the Leadership Conference, a recently convened meeting of Negro leaders, met in Tallahassee to consider jointly some of the problems posed by the recent Supreme Court decision that segregation in the public schools is unconstitutional. After lengthy consideration and frank discussions of the various viewpoints of both whites and Negroes, the joint committees agreed upon the following motion: **1. THAT, in a democratic society, public education is of paramount importance; THAT the State of Florida has made significant gains 46 BLEED THROUGH _ ——, TEE IS Aaa REN st tells ‘“ en © nth pe OE ey ree PCE ar ata! Aa ED me in recent years in the quality of its educational pro- gram and in the educational opportunities for all the youth of the State; THAT the State of Florida cannot afford the educa- tional or economic loss which would occur if we per- mitted a disruption of this program; THEREFORE, we believe that we must maintain and support a strong system of public education for all the youths of the State and that the citizens of Florida in their local contacts, through constant education and study, should work for the general education of all the people as prescribed by the laws of our State and Nation. 2. THAT we endorse the filing of the proposed brief by the Attorney General for the purpose of preserving the system of public education in the State of Florida when a final interpretation has been rendered by the Supreme Court. 3. THAT we urge this Committee to continue to work on the processes necessary for ultimate compliance with the law; THAT we encourage the organization of similar groups at the local level, i.e., school community by school com- munity, to work toward the same objectives.”’ The motion was approved unanimously. The Lakeland Ledger in an editorial August 29, 1954 said: ‘*In his annual speech to his home folk in Bartow on Friday, Senator Holland took occasion to talk about abolition of segregation in public schools... ‘*That attitude is the only one with which the problem now at hand can be solved, and it is the attitude of all clear thinking citizens in the South. ‘“‘Tf the process is not rushed, there will be a good chance of making the adjustment harmoniously over a period of years. ‘*Tf forces in the North that are unfamiliar with con- 47 BLURRED COPY ditions in the South insist upon rushing matters, there is certain to be harmful friction. ‘‘The level-headed view such as that expressed by Senator Holland must prevail.’’ The Tampa Morning Tribune in an editorial August 26, 1954, said: ‘‘In the brief which he is preparing to submit to the Supreme Court by October 1, Attorney General Ervin asks the court to go slow in ordering actual compliance with its edict of May 17 outlawing segregation. Mr. Ervin said: ‘My purpose in filing the brief is to try to show the court that Florida, from practical considerations, is not ready for desegregation immediately, but that if it must come eventually, it should come only after a reasonable period of time and then only on a county to county or local basis pursuant to administrative de- terminations made by local school authorities. It is en- tirely possible that if the court will authorize this course many of the situations will not be too difficult to solve, given time to work them out.’ ‘‘That, in our view, is sound sense and should appeal to the judgment of the high court. It is apparent that a change in the existing order can be effected only through careful and patient effort, on a local basis. Also it may prove necessary to have action by ihe Florida Legislature to properly implement the change. The essential issue is the dividing line between federal and state authority.”’ The St. Petersburg Times of August 27, 1954, reported a speech by County School Superintendent Floyd Christian of Pinellas County to a meeting of Negro school teachers, as follows: ‘*Pinellas County Negro teachers were urged as leaders of the community ‘to work patiently, calmly and sen- sibly’ on the segregation problem so that all can con- 48 BLEED THROUGH tinue working together for the growth of the com- munity... ‘*We live under the law and must follow the law. Riot- ing, hatred and action would wreck our school system and is not the answer. Florida must never try to abolish public education. Turning the schools into private in- stitutions is certainly not the answer. Any such action would prove disastrous to the quality of education and in the end would be judged by the Supreme Court as being an effort to circumvent the provisions of the Constitution of the United States. ‘‘What I am saying is in my opinion Florida should not try to circumvent the law. Any such action would encourage an attitude of general disregard for law and in the long run will only increase the difficulties without contributing anything toward the solution of the problem... ‘‘There is another reason why this problem will have to be approached with education and understanding. I don’t believe that here in the South, where you have had separate schools for nearly a hundred years, that an immediate court decision to stop it and integrate the students can be done successfully. I don’t believe you can legislate the people into doing this, they will have to be led by a systematic plan of education and this, of course, Will take time.’’ The Ft. Myers News-Press in an editorial August 28, 1954, said: ‘‘A number of Fort Myers citizens have received by mail this week circular letters purporting to come from the Ku Klux Klan which attempt to fan the flames of racial intolerance over the school segregation issue and make a bid for Klan recruits. ‘‘The letters enclose an application blank for mem- bership in the Klan returnable to an Orlando post office box. Whether they represent a bona fide recruiting drive by the Klan or just an effort of some crackpot or promoter trying to cash in on the current anxiety over prospective desegregation in the schools, the re- 49 BLURRED COPY cipients have no way of knowing, although Orlando always has been a hotbed of Ku Kluxism and the appli- cation blank probably is genuine. ‘There is nothing doubtful, however, about the hate literature enclosed with the KKK circulars. The fat envelopes—so bulky that most recipients had to pay an extra three cents postage due—-were crammed with highly inflammatory articles against the Negro race and slanders against various public officials and indi- viduals fit only for the sewer. In the delicate situation which now confronts both whites and Negroes arising from the Supreme Court anti-segregation ruling—a situation that calls for all the calmness and clear think- ing that can be mustered—outpourings such as this are not only unhelpful but dangerous.’’ The Orlando Sentinel in an editorial August 19, 1954, said: ‘‘As a result of a survey recently completed by an interracial committee appointed by the attorney gen- eral, it has been made perfectly clear that even in Flor- ida many people of both groups are not ready to send their children to the same school together, and that law enforcement agencies are not prepared to enforce such laws or to prevent the violence which would arise under such circumstances. ‘‘The problem varies from community to community just as it does from state to state and the difficulty in- creases in direct ratio to the number of Negroes present. It would be a relatively simple matter to enforce de- segregation in a community where there would be only one or two Negroes in a classroom, as would be the case in most northern cities. It is not so simple where the numbers of the two races are more nearly equal. ‘*This happens to be the case in many of our smaller north and west Florida towns, as well as in most of the rural areas of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama and Mississippi. In some Florida cities, however, particu- larly in South Florida, there are relatively few Negroes and the opposition to their admittance to white schools is not so prevalent. 50 BLEED THROUGH — ‘*Clearly it would be unfair to expect public officials to overcome the problems of integration all at the same time without regard to the difficulties involved. The Supreme Court should take cognizance of the inherent differences among individuals as among communities and leave the problem of when desegregation can safely be accomplished to local authorities.’’ The Miami Herald in an editorial of May 24, 1954, said: ‘*Anticipating that the United States Supreme court might end segregation in the schools, as it did last week, Florida leaders have been quietly taking stock of the state’s educational resources. ‘‘They recognized that the change, when it came, would be the most momentous since the War Between the States, and no family would escape its effects. ‘“‘What this study showed was that Florida has made more progress in Negro education, probably, than any other state with segregation, and is in a better posi- tion to meet the challenge of the court ruling.’’ These meetiugs and examples of editorial opinion may appear insignificant but when considered in relation to the fact that they took place in a State which still has three counties where no Negroes have registered to vote (see page 178, Appendix A), and whose peace officers are over- whelmingly opposed to desegregation in any form (see Table 3, page 138, Appendix A), they should not be ignored. We believe that any attempt to compel an immediate de- segregation in Florida schools would constitute a shock treatment so drastic that any further efforts on the part of these and similar groups would be promptly nullified. Such efforts on the part of citizens’ committees of both races can only take place as voluntary manifestations of good citizenship. They cannot take place in an atmosphere of fear and coercion. 51 x . ce os pati Re ‘ A. BLURRED COPY F. Regional Variations One of the most important factors which has emerged from our study of the segregation problem in Florida is the clear indication of marked regional variations in the in- tensity of the feelings of the people. The State of Florida is unlike other Southern states in one significant respect. Geographically it is large and sprawled out over an area of a thousand miles extending from Pensacola in West Florida to Key West on the south- ernmost tip. Between these two extremes can be found startling dif- ferences in the social customs and traditions of the people inhabiting the various counties. Generally speaking, the influx of people from northern states has tended to settle in South Florida and this has altered to some extent the social pattern of South Florida counties, whereas North and West Florida counties have remained to a large extent populated by people of Florida or Southern ancestry who cling to Southern traditions and customs. It must be emphasized, however, that this type of gen- eralization is apt to be misleading because counties and communities may be found in South Florida where the de- gree of racial differences in feeling may be even more pro- nounced than -n the northern part of the state. These variations indicate that there may be communities 53 NO PAGE NUMBER eases DAES Pog een! Seat Bo 5S aie CeCe: row lag aE te le in Florida where conditions are such that local school offi- cials would feel justified in proceeding within a relatively short time to integrate the white and Negro schools. On the other hand, there are many counties, notably those having a large Negro population, where it is apparent that any attempt to bring about immediate desegregation would result in violence and bring the school system to a complete standstill. These variations in community attitudes and conditions preclude the practicability of any overall, statewide de- tailed plan, time schedule or target date for desegregation which might be evolved. We believe that whatever plan and time schedule is adopted in each community must, if it is to be workable, have been produced through the efforts of the local school officials who understand the specific prob- lems involved and who must be willing to undertake to make the plan work. We do not believe that the courts should undertake to perform the functions of local school boards and we do not believe that this Court should insist on a plan of action which, in its efforts to guard the rights of some, must necessarily forsake the rights of all others. 54 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY G. Discussion In suggesting an affirmative answer to question 4B, we have attempted to take into consideration the wide range and complexity of the problem. We know that from its common-sense practical aspects a successful implementation requires the blending of the best administrative and judicial techniques over a reasonable period of time which will vary in each school district or county, dependent upon the cir- cumstances. Admitted that segregation has been held un- constitutional as a class discrimination, that does not mean that transition to the actuality of non-segregated educa- tion can be accomplished immediately or without planning and preparation and administrative actions. The public welfare of the segregated states is involved in the transition along with administrative details. It would be unwise not to permit the exercise of reasonable regula- tions under the police power during the transitional period in the interest of peace in the community and good order and safety in the schools. The white people of the segregated states have too long relied upon the doctrines expressed in Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U. 8S. 537, 16 S. Ct. 1138, 41 L. Ed. 256 (1896) to be expected to accept complacently the new order. Our survey amply bears this out. Therefore, we most earnestly and sincerely urge the Court to permit that degree of latitude necessary to the segregated states and the county school boards therein to bring about an effective gradual adjustment to inte- gration so as to soften and ameliorate the transition and preserve peace and order in the communities and the 55 a Z 4 ee ee ee Bikes ne SRNR I eR EFF schools in the process and that these officials be accorded the discretion to make the transition successfully and effectively in good time and good order. Even though it has been held the Negro child should not be discriminated against in his public education nor unduly postponed in his enjoyment of it, surely that right is not so absolute, so compelling in its nature, that reasonable admin- istrative procedures necessary for the public welfare can- not be asserted during the transition period. If there ever was a condition which needs elasticity in the application of constitutional guaranties to meet it, certainly it is the transition period from the segregated school system to the non-segregated school system in the various schools of the South. By a concurrent application of prudent and sensible ad- ministrative and judicial techniques the problem may even- tually be solved. But the Court should always allow the states involved and their officials, both state and local, the opportunity to first work out the problem and accord to their determinations a wide degree of discretion and lati- tude in the integration. The Court has said in Minersville School District v. Gobitis, 310 U. S. 586, 60 S, Ct. 1010, 84 L. Ed. 1375, (1940), it would not make itself the school board of the country. That does not mean the Court, beginning with the court of first instance, would not always reserve the judicial authority to review and probe. It would ex- ercise this authority where in proper cases duly brought it was alleged the county school board had not made the requisite effort in good faith to desegregate in line with appropriate criteria or factors which we believe the Court will outline in its implementation decision. Parenthetically and most earnestly, we urge the Court to accept the factors we have outlined, believing them to be essential to suc- cessful implementation in the light of problems involved. BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY -., Nha Bi tar aha ok ha A EN Fl tach ENT tl EE Part Two Specific Suggestions to the Court in Formulating a Decree 57 Introductory Note We do not suggest delay merely for the sake of delay itself. We do suggest that sufficient time be permitted for a gradual effective adjustment to desegregated schools to take place in each community. The period of time required will vary in each community dependent upon its administrative problems and the attitude of its people. The length of this period of transition in each instance can only be determined by the local school authori- ties subject to the review of the courts of first instance when called upon to consider specific suits brought because of a disagreement with the school authorities over admis- sion policies. We do not believe that any court should at any time attempt to peremptorily compel school officials to integrate schools in a community when it is apparent that such action will create hostility and resentment to such a degree that the schools cannot be operated in an orderly manner. We believe that any attempt to establish an overall specific plan for desegregation by the United States Su- preme Court as a result of recommendations of a special master would be totally unrealistic and would in effect place this Court in the position of attempting to function as the county schoo] board of the counties affected. We believe that the courts of first instance should also avoid any attempt to exercise administrative powers nor- mally delegated to school officials. They should not be 59 NO PAGE NUMBER Pee SASL TAA aa et nn! On ey — shin ey eee spit aba Aan SachaARiabednct required to spell out in specific detail the means by which they would require a school district to comply with the new requirements of the law. Rather, let them leave to responsible local school authorities the task of drafting plans for transition, and then apply to each such plan pre- sented in the course of litigation the test of good faith. Widespread white hostility to immediate, enforced inte- gration of the public schools is a fact of life in Florida, and is just as real a factor in considering the future of public education as schoo] finance, school construction or any other. We ask only this; that school officials not be deprived of the right to recognize local factors related to the welfare of public schools and to exercise the same discretion in dealing with the feelings of the people regarding segregation that they would exercise in dealing with any other local condition or problem that directly affected the proper operation of the public schools. We urge, therefore, that the Supreme Court remand these cases to the courts of first instance—in all but one of these cases federal district courts—and that it vest in the courts of first instance broad discretionary powers to determine as findings of fact (1) what should be a reason- able time for transition in any given case, and (2) whether or not specific plans for compliance with the Court’s general directive prepared by responsible local school officials measure up to the broad test of good faith. We offer the following specific suggestions for the con- sideration of the Court in the formulation of its decree: BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY y= ee eee Specific Suggestions I. It is suggested that the United States Supreme Court in its implementation decision or decree adopt the pro- cedure contemplated in questions 4 (b) and 5 (d) as stated in the footnote in the Brown decision: ‘4 (b) may this Court, in the exercise of its equity powers, permit an effective gradual adjustment to be brought about from existing segregated systems to a system not based on color distinctions?’’ **5 (d) should this Court remand to the courts of first instance with directions to frame decrees in these cases, and if so, what general directions should the decrees of this Court include and what procedures should the courts of first instance follow in arriving at the specific terms of more detailed decrees?’’ II. It is suggested that the United States Supreme Court in its implementation decision in the Brown case direct that the courts of first instance consider all suits brought to gain admittance to a specific school and claiming discrimina- tion because of color, in accord with the following general directions: A. The petitioner must affirmatively show; (1) That admission to the school in question was re- quested by the petitioner within a reasonable time before the beginning of the school term. (2) That the petitioner resides within the limits set by normal geographic school districting of the school he seeks to enter. 61 (3) That admission to said school was denied by the local school authorities and that all other admin- istrative remedies such as appeal to the State Board of Education (where provided by law) have been exhausted. B. It is suggested that the court of first instance con- duct hearings, take testimony, determine the merits of the petition and the answer thereto and the equitable reasons which may exist which would justify the school authorities in refusing to approve the petitioner’s ap- plication for admission to the school in question. In conducting such proceedings, the court should consider: (1) Evidence as to whether the state school authori- ties and legislature have had a reasonable amount of time to reorganize the legal provisions of the state schoo] structure to comply with the Brown decision. (2) Evidence of good faith on the part of the school authorities in seeking to comply with the Brown de- cision and integrate the public schools. Such evi- dence should include: (a) Efforts previously made and in progress to overcome practical, administrative problems en- countered in integrating schools as proclaimed by this Court. (b) Efforts previously made and in progress to promote citizens’ educational committees and in- terracial committees for the purpose of improving racial relations in the community and avoiding racial antagonisms in the schools. (3) Evidence and recommendations submitted by in- terracial citizens’ committees which may be organ- ized pursuant to law for the purpose of assisting the local school authorities, or evidence and recommen- dations submitted by impartial survey and fact- finding teams which may be created by the State Board of Education pursuant to its administrative powers. (4) Evidence of existing administrative problems 62 BLEED THROUGH RITIReEEnNM COPY , of integration which have not as yet been solved and which would jeopardize the efficient operation of the school system if the petitioner’s application for ad- mission was granted immediately. (5) Evidence of such a strong degree of sincere op- position and sustained hostility on the part of the public to the granting of the petitioner’s applica- tion, as to give the school authorities reasonable grounds to believe that immediate approval of the petitioner’s application would cause a disruption of the school system or create emotional responses among the children which would seriously interfere with their education. Such evidence should be care- fully analyzed by the court to determine its validity and all evidence of this nature which might appear to be simulated or fabricated for the purpose of con- tinuing segregated schools in the community should be rejected. (6) Evidence that the petitioner’s application was made in good faith and not for capricious reasons. Such evidence should demonstrate: (a) That the petitioner personally feels that he would be handicapped in his education, either be- eause of lack of school plant facilities or psycho- logical or sociological reasons if his application for admission is denied. (b) That the petitioner is not motivated in his ap- plication solely by a desire for the advancement of a racial group on economic, social or political grounds, as distinguished from his personal legal right to equality in public school education as guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. This distine- tion should be carefully drawn. This Court has ruled that segregated schools are forbidden by the 14th Amendment because they may deprive the Negro of an equal opportunity in acquiring an edu- cation. During the process of desegregating schools it should always be kept in mind that the sole legal purpose of public schools is to educate. The public school system has never been permitted under Florida law to extend its activities into the 63 ai pak bets ETRE ae te eee SFE PAL LOIS, BLO BL OLE AIRES AE VBARBE LEAL LK ARLE IEVC LE FEA LAD 0 OS, ONC field of public welfare or related purposes. It is not the purpose or within the legal authority of the Florida public school system to provide a di- rect means of improving the social, political or economic status of any group or individual except as such improvement may in time result from edu- cation itself. Public schools are not intended to provide experiments in race relations or to use children as sociological guinea pigs in the solution of problems in many walks of life which adults have not been able to solve by other means. III. It is suggested that based upon the testimony and evidence submitted, the court of first instance may either: (A) Order that the petitioner’s application for admis- sion to the school in question be granted forthwith, if it appears that the petition was made in good faith and that there exist no reasonable grounds for delay on the part of the school board in approving the peti- tioner’s application for admission. (B) Dismiss the petition if it appears that it was not made in good faith and well founded in law according to the interpretation of the 14th Amendment by this court in the Brown.case. ~ (C) Order the school authorities to hold the petition- er’s application in abeyance for a reasonable period of time to allow for further adjustment to a single school system if necessary, with directions to the school au- thorities to proceed to overcome as soon as possible the practical or psychological and sociological factors which prevent an immediate approval of the peti- tioner’s application. If the latter alternative is found to be necessary by the court it should include in its order the following: (1) Fix a time for rehearing of the petitioner’s appli- cation by the court within a stated reasonable time at which hearing additional testimony and evidence will be received and the circumstances justifying delay in approving the petitioner’s application for 64 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY admission will be re-evaluated by the court in the light of altered conditions and a supplemental order entered in the case in accord with the findings of the court. (2) Direct the scho ' authorities to formulate and submit to the court within a reasonable time a plan designed to overcome the practical and psychological obstacles which tend to prevent an immediate inte- gration of the schools under their jurisdiction. The effectiveness of the plan submitted and the efforts which the school authorities have made in good faith to carry it out should be considered by the court on subsequent rehearing of the case in determining whether additional delay is justified in granting the petitioner’s application for admission. 65 Part Three Legal Authority of the Court to Per- mit a Period of Gradual Adjustment and Broad Powers of Administrative Discretion on the Part of Local School Authorities. 67 NO PAGE NUMBER A. Judicial Cases Permitting Time Many decisions of the United States Supreme Court and the State Supreme Courts have recognized the necessity for granting a reasonable time in which to comply with the decree of the Court to avoid hardship or injury to public or private interests. The present decision requires more consideration of the problem of time and adjustment than in the earlier cases since it is apparent that it involves a vast problem of human engineering, as contrasted to previous delays for adjust- ment granted in anti-trust cases, nuisance cases, and similar cases where economic problems of great magnitude con- fronted the courts. I. United States v. American Tobacco Co., 221 U. S. 106, 31 S. Ct. 632, 55 L. Ed. 663 (1911). Recognizing the need for adjustment to its remedies in dealing with the unlawful combinations under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, the Court, in order to avoid and mitigate possible injury to the interest of the general public, decreed the commercial combination to be illegal; and directed the Court below to hear the parties, ascertain, and determine a plan or method of dis- solution, and to recreate a condition in harmony in law. To accomplish this, the Court granted a reasonable period (8 months) to effectuate its decree, while prohibiting any en- largement of the corporation’s monopoly during this period. Briefly stated, six months, with a possible extension of 69 NO PAGE NUMBER oa sixty days, was granted in which to work out a plan for dissolving a combination found to control the tobacco in- dustry in violation of the Anti-Trust Act of July 2, 1890 (26 State at L. 209, Ch. 647, USC Title 15, s1), and creating out of the elements composing it a condition which would not be repugnant to the prohibitions of the Act. II. In Standard Oil Co. v. U. S., 221 U.S. 1, 31 8. Ct. 502, 55 L, Ed. 619 (1910), the Court again recognized the need for time in putting into effect its decision. In this case Chief Justice White stated that the magnitude of the interests involved and their complexity required that six months be given in which to execute a decree for the dis- solution of a holding company controlling the oil industry % in violation of the Anti-Trust Act of July 2, 1890, and for the transfer back to the stockholders of the subsidiary cor- porations of the stock which had been turned over to the holding company in exchange for its own stock. In the area of nuisance litigation, the Supreme Court has often recognized the need for a period of gradual transition in order to effectuate decisions. In the Case of New Jersey v. New York, 283 U.S. 473, 75 L. Ed. 1176, 51 8. Ct. 519, (1931), the State of New Jersey sued New York City in the United States Supreme Court for an injunction restrict- ing the dumping of New York City’s garbage into the ocean off the New Jersey coast. Injunction was granted in the opinion by Butler, J., affirming a special master’s report. A decree was entered, declaring that the plaintiff State of New Jersey was entitled to an injunction as sought in the complaint; but that before (italics supplied) an injunc- tion was issued, a reasonable time would be accorded to the defendant, within which to carry into effect its proposed plan for the erection and operation of incinerators to destroy the waste materials which were being dumped off the New Jersey coast, or to provide other means to be approved by the decree for the disposal of such materials. 70 i BP Pte ee ee ot BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY Reasonable time was a question of fact to be decided upon by the same special master, after hearing and evalu- ating all witnesses’ testimonies from each party or witnes- ses which the master may select to be heard. The master was then to report to the court his findings and a form of decree. On a rehearing of the case on December 7, 1931, (284 U.S. 585,75 L. Ed. 506, 52 8, Ct. 120) a decree was entered by the Supreme Court prohibiting any further dumping of refuse, etc., into the ocean off the coast of New Jersey. Said decree was to become effective on and after June 1, 1933, and progress reports were to be filed with the clerk of the Supreme Court on April 1 and October 1 of each year beginning April 1, 1932, setting forth the progress made in the construction of incinerator plants, etc., for the final disposition of garbage and refuse, and also the amount of material dumped at sea during the periods covered by such reports. Provision was also made in the decree that upon the re- ceipt of said reports, and on due notice to the other party, either party to the suit could apply to the Court for such action or relief with respect to the time allowed for the con- struction, or method of operation of the proposed incinera- tor plants, or other means of final disposition of garbage, etc., as may be deemed appropriate. In other words, the flexibility of the decree permitted frequent re-evaluation to promote the greatest justice to all parties. On May 29, 1933 (289 U. 8.712) Mr. Chief Justice Hughes announced a new order, based on the failure of New York City to comply with the decree of December 7, 1931. The defendant asked that the time for taking effect of the in- junction be extended from June 1, 1933 to April 1, 1934. It was ordered that these applications be heard on Novem- ber 6, 1933, that E. K. Cambell be appointed Special Master, empowered to hear witnesses, issue subpoenas, take evi- dence offered by interested parties, and also such as he may deem necessary to show: 71 a (A) What shall have been done by defendant city, up to September 15, 1933, and the time reasonably re- quired to enable it to comply with the decree. (B) The amounts spent by the plaintiff New Jersey to prevent harm to its beaches, waters, etc., subsequent to June 1, 1933, and the damages sustained by them as a result of New York’s failure to comply with the de- cree. The Special Master’s findings were subject to considera- tion, revision, or approval by the Court. On December 9, 1935 (296 U.S. 259, 80 L. Ed. 214, 56 S. Ct. 188), Mr. Justice Butler announced a new decree modifying in effect the decree of December 4, 1933. The latter decree enjoined New York City from dumping refuse off the New Jersey coast, stipulating a five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) a day penalty for failure to comply. On October 7, 1935, New York City sought a modification of the decree, and asked for a petition to have New Jersey show cause why a ruling could not be made to the effect that ten miles (10) off shore dumping is satisfactory as to non-floating material, or, in the alternative, why the Court should not modify its decree so as to permit the defendant to dump non-floating sewage as aforesaid. Defendant’s motion for leave to file was granted. I ee er Cn Ee eee ee It should be noted that the original decree was handed down in 1931 and continued modification took place for some four (4) years in order to effectuate the original decree. Recognition for additional time was given each time the case reappeared before the Court. Ill. The Supreme Court again recognized the need for a calm period of gradual transition to effectuate its decree, in the Gaseous Nuisance Cases in which it took some nine (9) years to implement its decrees. 72 LIM CO tale Te ee et BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY — The first case was that of Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co., 206 U.S. 230, 51 L. Ed. 1038, 27 8S. Ct. 618 (1907). In this case the State of Georgia sought to enjoin the de- fendant copper companies from discharging noxious gases from their works in Tennessee over the plaintiff’s territory. The State alleged that such discharges were destroying entire forest, orchard, and crop lands, and that irreparable injuries were being done and threatened in five counties of Georgia. A preliminary injunction was denied, but, as there were grounds to fear that great and irreparable damage might be done, an early day was fixed for the final hearing, and the parties were given leave, if so minded, to try the cases on affidavits. Mr. Justice Holmes held that if the State of Georgia adhered to its determination, there was no alternative to issuing an injunction, after allowing a reasonable time for the defendants to complete the strue- tures then being built, and efforts the companies were mak- ing to stop the flow of fumes and gases into Georgia. The plaintiff Georgia was permitted to submit a form of decree on the coming in of the Court in the following October. Eight (8) years later, on May 10, 1915, the Supreme Court again heard the same case, in the State of Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co. and Ducktown Sulphur, Copper, € Iron Co., Ltd., 237 U.S. 474, 59 L. Ed. 1054, 35 S. Ct. 631 (1915). This case is a continuation of the earlier one, supra (1907), in regard to the nuisance of gaseous fumes harming the property within the State of Georgia. In the earlier case, hope was entertained that some practical method of sub- duing the noxious fumes could be devised and by consent, the time for entering a final decree was enlarged. Both companies installed purifying devices. The original de- fendant, Tennessee Copper and Georgia, entered into a stipulation whereby the former undertook annually to supply a fund to compensate those injured by fumes from 73 a its works, to conduct its plant subject to inspection in speci- fied ways, and between April 10 and October 1, not to ‘‘operate more green ore furnaces than it finds necessary to permit of operating its sulphuric acid plant at its normal full capacity.’’ The State of Georgia agreed to refrain from asking for an injunction prior to October, 1916, if the stipulation was fully observed. Ducktown Company and the State were unable to agree, and in February, 1914, the latter moved for a decree according a perpetual in- junction. Consideration of the matter was postponed upon representation that conditions had materially changed since 1907, and leave was granted to present additional testimony “‘to relate solely to the changed conditions,’’ if any, which may have arisen since the case was then decided. A decree was granted restraining the Ducktown Company from con- tinuing to operaie its plant other than upon the terms and conditions set out by the Court (Decree set forth in 237 U.S. 678, 59 L. Ed. 1173, 35 S. Ct. 752 (1915) ). A new decree was issued April 3, 1916 in 240 U.S. 650, 60 L. Ed. 846, 36 S. Ct. 465, (1916). This decree modified the former decrees as to the escapement of fumes, as to records to be kept in regard thereto, and also as to expense of in- spection and division of costs. The three(3) cases, dealing with the problem of escaping nuisances, cover a span of nine (9) years (from 1907 to 1916). It illustrates how long a period is required to adjust to incorporeal changes and strongly suggests that human changes obviously require greater periods, since human emotions are not as easily controlled as are gaseous mate- rials from sulphur and copper plants. Recognition of the need of calm planning in good faith to reconcile difficult problems has often been illustrated by the Court in con- texts of economic and social changes as a result of its decisions. 74 PRR SS RR ARIE EG AS I LM CREB ENO OE MOSEL NY SOT me BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY IV. In People of the State of New York v. State of New Jersey and Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners, 256 U.S. 296, 65 L, Ed. 937, 41 8. Ct. 492 (1921), at page 313, Mr. Justice Clarke, in refusing to grant injunction relief against the operation of sewerage disposal by New Jersey into New York Harbor, wisely stated: ‘‘We cannot withhold the suggestion, inspired by the consideration of this case, that the grave problem of sewage disposal presented by the large and growing populations living on the shores of New York Bay is one more likely to be wisely solved by cooperative study and by conference and mutual concession on the part of Representatives of the States so vitally interested in it than by proceedings in any Court however con- stituted.’’ This quotation strongly suggests the need for time to work out these difficult intangible relations, in an atmos- phere of cooperation and reason, rather than a tremendous disruption of social and economic conditions. V. In the case of Martin Bldg. Co. v. Imperial Laundry Co., 220 Ala. 90, 124 So. 82, the Supreme Court of Alabama recognized the need for time in the use of injunctive relief. In a suit by the owner of an office building to en- join a laundry from emitting smoke over the complain- ant’s premises, the basis of the suit was the discomfort to the building’s tenants, endangering of their health, and the resulting loss of tenants. The question of the abatement of the nuisance by improved technological laundry methods had to be further considered before the Court would grant or refuse injunctive relief, in view of suggested means of reducing amount of smoke by use of stokers. This acted to delay the force of the injunctive relief sought. 75 B. Administrative Discretion Cases The use of administrative discretion and its limits have often been spelled out by the Court in the areas of adminis- trative agencies. The Court has consistently emphasized that supervision and discretion should lie with the adminis- trative agencies in the conducting of their functons as economic and political governing boards. Such emphasis is closely related to the administrative discretion which should exist in school boards, also. I. In United States v. Paramount Pictures, 334 U. S. 131, 92 L. Ed. 1260, 68 8. Ct. 915, (1948), Mr. Justice Douglas reviewed a decree in an injunction suit by the United States under the Sherman Act to eliminate or qualify certain busi- ness practices in the motion picture industry. A provision in the decree that films be licensed on a competitive bidding basis was eliminated by the Supreme Court as not likely to bring about the desired end as involving too much judicial supervision to make it effective. This elimination was held to require reconsideration by the district court of its pro- hibition of the expansion of theatre holdings by distributors and provisions for divesting existing holdings. The pro- priety of including in the decree a provision for voluntary arbitration of questions arising thereunder was indicated, and denial of applications for leave to intervene by persons challenging the eliminated provision for competitive bid- ding was upheld. 77 NO PAGE NUMBER a Mr. Justice Douglas was strongly opposed to the judiciary administrating industry, and favored voluntary arbitration: At page 163 he stated: ‘*It would involve the judiciary in the administration of intricate and detailed rules governing priority, per- iod of clearance, length of run, competitive areas, rea- sonable return and the like. The system would be apt to require as close a supervision as a continuous re- ceivership, unless the defendants were to be entrusted with vast discretion. The judiciary is unsuited to af- fairs of business management; and control through the power of contempt is crude and clumsy and lacking in the flexibility necessary to make continuous and de- tailed supervision effective.’’ The implications of Mr. Justice Douglas’s opposition to ; judicial administration of intricate and detailed rules in the economic field could readily apply to the social relationship ’ and problems created by the recent holding in the Brown case. II. Further evidence of the broad discretion that was permitted by the Supreme Court in administrative agencies is evidenced in the case cf Alabama Public Service Commis- sion v. Southern Railway Company, 341 U.S. 341, 95 L. Ed. 1002, 71 S. Ct. 762, (1951). A railroad, prohibited by state law from discontinuing trains without permission of the state public service commission was denied such permission on the ground that though the trains were being operated at a loss there was a public need for the service. Alleging 3 that irreparable loss would result either from continued operation of the trains or from incurring the penalty im- posed by state law for discontinuance without the commis- sion’s permission, the railroad sought and obtained an in- junction in a federal district court against the enforcement of the statute. anibinechitagtis eran ee es ERTS te The U. 8. Supreme Court, through Chief Justice Vinson, 78 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY a reversed the district court, and held that the federal court’s exercise of such jurisdiction should, on considerations of comity, be withheld on the ground that the state law pro- vided for review of the commission’s order in the state courts and for its stay pending such review. Some persuasive language in support of state administra- tive discretion appears at pages 347-348: ‘‘The Alabama Commission, after a hearing held in the area served, found a public need for the service. The court below, hearing evidence de novo, found that no public necessity exists in view of the increased use and availability of motor transportation. We do not at- tempt to resolve these inconsistent findings of fact. We take note, however, of the fact that a federal court has been asked to intervene in resolving the essentially local problem of balancing the loss to the railroad from continued operation of trains . .. with public need for that service...directly affected....’’ (Italics sup- plied). More support to the finality of the discretion of the com- mission is found on page 348: ‘* .,. and whatever the scope of review of commission findings when an alleged denial of constitutional rights is in issue, it is now settled that a utility has no right to relitigate factual questions on the ground that con- stitutional rights are involved. New York v. United States, 331 U.S. 284, 334-336 (1947)....’’ (Italics sup- plied) More directly in point, at pages 349-350 is found the following: ‘ ‘* |, . as adequate state court review of an administra- tive order based upon predominantly local factors is available to appellee intervention of a federal court is not necessary for the protection of federal rights. Equi- table relief may be granted, only when the District Court, in its sound discretion exercised with the ‘seru- pulous regard for the rightful independence of state 79 SARNIA OE Be ne FO FE ee RT eS I SOT cer Leet tae ee key a A Cw mee _ governments which should at all times actuate the fed- eral courts,’ is convinced that the asserted federal right cannot be preserved except by granting the ‘extraordi- nary relief of an injunction in the federal courts.’ Con- sidering that ‘few public interests have a higher claim upon the discretion of a federal chancellor than the avoidance of needless friction with state policies,’ the usual rule of comity must govern the exercise of equi- table jurisdiction by the District Court in this ease... .”’ (Italics supplied) And again at page 351, ‘‘It is in the public interest that federal courts of equity should exercise their discretionary power to grant or withhold relief so as to avoid needless obstruction of the domestic policy of the states....’’ Ill. Further evidence of the broad discretion permitted by the Supreme Court to state administrative agencies is found in the case of Burford v. Sun Oil Co., 319 U. S. 315, 87 L. Ed, 1424, 63 S. Ct. 1098 (1943). In this case the Sun Oil Co. attacked the validity of an order of the Texas Railroad Commission granting the petitioner Burford a permit to drill oil wells on a small plot of land in the East Texas oil fields. The U. S. District Court for the western district of Texas dismissed the suit by the Company; the Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the District Court. The Supreme Court through Mr. Justice Black reversed the Circuit Court of Appeals, and affirmed the District Court. The Supreme Court held that a federal equity court may properly decline to exercise its jurisdiction invoked because of diversity of citizenship of the parties and alleged in- fringement of constitutional rights; to determine the valid- ity of a state commission order, made under the authority of a conservation statute, granting a permit to drill oil wells on certain property, adjacent to lands owned by the com- plainant, where the state has provided a uniform method for the formation of policy and determination of cases by 80 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY the commission and the state courts; and where the judicial review of the commission’s decisions in the state courts is expeditious and adequate; and where intervention by the lower federal courts is likely to cause delay and conflicting interpretation of the state law, dangerous to the success of state domestic policies. The Court, at page 320, explicitly states: ‘‘The primary task of attempting adjustment of these diverse interests is delegated to the Railroad Commis- sion, which Texas has vested with ‘broad discretion’ in administering the law.’’ The Court points out that the Texas courts have the power of thorough judicial review of the decisions of the Railroad Commisson; and that the Texas courts are work- ing partners with the Commission in the business of creating a regulatory system for the oil industry. The Commission is charged with principal responsibility for fact finding and for policy making and the courts expressly disclaim the administrative responsibility. On the other hand, orders of the Commission are tested for ‘‘reasonableness’’ by trial de novo before the state court, and the Court may on oc- casion make a careful analysis of all the facts of the case in reversing a Commission order. The state court may even formulate new standards for the Commission’s adminis- trative practice, and suggest that the Commission adopt them. The Supreme Court recognized that the existence of prob- lems throughout the oil regulatory field creates a possibility of serious delay which can injure the conservation program ; and that it may be necessary to stay federal action pending authoritative determination of difficult state questions. It recognized that questions of state regulation of the oil industry so clearly involve basic problems of Texas policy that equitable discretion should be exercised to give the Texas courts the first opportunity to consider them. 81 Meno Pye Re Bete fe eee ee 7 Ae A tk Ba 6 Eh ee v Ps > res ) dae = JA eet) GE TE) ae RRS Bae ta REALE REP IN DN GS SET IES SES AP REE DELS *: veer IV Concrete evidence of the Supreme Court’s adher- ence to complete administrative discretion is found in the case of Far Eastern Conference, United States Lines Co., States Marine Corporation, et al. v. United States and Fed- eral Maritime Board, 342, U. S. 570, 96 L. Ed. 576,72 8. Ct. 492 (1952). The suit was brought by the government to en- join the dual rate system established by an association of steamship companies known as the Far East Conference. The companies never submitted the rates to the Federal Maritime Board for approval, as provided for in §15 of the Shipping Act (46 USC §814). The defense, that the issues involved were of such a technical nature calling for the application of administrative exercise as to make it im- proper to bypass the Board, was upheld by the Court through Justice Frankfurter. It was held that the administrative agencies should not be bypassed by the Courts in cases raising issues of fact not within the conventional experiences of judges or in cases requiring the exercise of administrative discretion, even though the facts, after they have been appraised by specialized competence, serve as a premise for legal conse- quences to be judicially defined. ” V. ‘‘But the courtroom is not the arena for debating issues of educational policy. It is not our province to choose among competing considerations in the subtle process of securing effective loyalty to the traditional ideals of de- mocracy, while respecting at the same time individual idiosyncrasies among a people so diversified in social origins and religious alliances. So to hold would in effect make us the school board for the country.’’ Minersville School District v. Gobitis, 310 U.S. 586, 60 S. Ct. 1010, 84 L. Ed. 1375 (1940), at 310 U. 8. 598 (Italics supplied). 82 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY | | al Parenthetically, the Court, in this case recognizes its limitations in the abstract sciences, with this language at page 597: ‘The precise issue, then, for us to decide is whether the legislatures of tie various states and the authori- ties in a thousand cc inties and school districts of this country are barred f::om determining the appropriate- ness of various means to evoke that unifying sentiment without which there can ultimately be no liberties, civil or religious. To stigmatize legislative judgment in pro- viding for this universal gesture of respect for the sym- bol of our national life in the setting of the common school as a lawless inroad on that freedom of conscience which the Constitution protects, would amount to no less than the pronouncement of pedagogical and psy- chological dogma in a field where courts possess no marked and certainly no controlling competence.”’ Constitutional guarantees of personal liberty are not always absolutes. Government has the right to maintain public safety and good order. Keeping the control of public education close to the local people is perhaps the strftagest tradition in American edu- cation. One of the predominant characteristics of American education is the variation in local policies and procedures in terms of unique local conditions. This is in sharp con- trast to the highly centralized national system of education of other countries. VI. ‘‘Civil liberties, as guaranteed by the Constitution, imply the existence of an organized society maintaining public order without which liberty itself would be lost in the excesses of unrestrained abuses.’’ Cox v. New Hamp- shire, 312 U. 8S. 569, 61 S. Ct. 762, 85 L. Ed. 1049 (1941) at 312 U.S. 574. u- : preme Court in Barbier v. Connolly, 113 U. 8. 27, 5 S. Ct. 357, 28 L, Ed. 923 (1885), said at page 31: VII. Speaking of the 14th Amendment, the U. S. S ‘But neither the amendment—broad and compre- hensive as it is—nor any other amendment, was de- signed to interfere with the power of the State, some- times termed its police power, to prescribe regulations to promote the health, peace, morals, education and good order of the people...’’ (Italics supplied) VIIL. In Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U. S. 365, 47 8. Ct. 114, 71 L, Ed. 303 (1926), it said at page 387: ‘*Regulations, the wisdom, necessity, and validity of which, as applied to existing conditions, are so apparent that they are now uniformly sustained, a century ago, or even a half century ago, probably would have been rejected as arbitrary or oppressive ... while the mean- ing of constitutional guaranties never varies, the scope of their application must expand or contract to meet new and different conditions which are constantly coming within the field of their operation ... Laws and regulations must find their justification in some aspect of the police power, asserted for the public welfare.”’ BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY y) 7 4 C. Remarks The aforesaid summary shows the wise recognition by the Supreme Court in the past of the need for time in effecting certain economic changes in our society in order to allow a period of healthy adjustment in sensitive areas. The cases also show a recognition of the need for adequate local dis- cretion in the same areas. This line of reasoning should be applied to the even more sensitive area of desegregation which presents a vast problem of human engineering to re- solve the social changes sought. Samuel Gompers, one of Amcrica’s greatest labor leaders recognized this fact some years ago when he stated: ‘‘One fact stands out in bold relief in history of men’s attempts for betterment. That is that when com- pulsion is used, only resentment is aroused, and in the end nothing is gained. Only through moral suasion and appeal to men’s reason can a movement succeed.’* 85 NO PAGE NUMBER Part Four Considerations Involved in Formulating Plans For Desegregation 87 A. Changes in the Law Dr. Rupert B. Vance, Professor of Sociology, University of North Carolina, past president of the American Socio- logical Society, writing in the Journal of Public Law, Emory University Law School, Vol. 3, Spring 1954, Number 1, page 42, says: ‘‘National prohibition offers an example of a change in law which did not carry through to change in the collective behavior and attitudes of society. In spite of our respect for the Constitution, resistance increased and law enforcement was insufficient to bring about social change. This resistance assumed the form of violations, as well as evasions, of the law. Under this situation it can be said that the 18th Amendment was repealed in order to preserve respect for the law. This occurred in spite of the fact that the initial change had the support of public opinion as represented in the (1) affirmative vote of legislatures of the states, and was implemented both by (2) federal legislation, as in the Volstead Act, and (3) supporting legislation in many states. For students of social change, the con- trast with a decision of the Supreme Court is impres- sive. ‘*Thus, while students of law realize that social change ean be and has been implemented by legal enactment and judicial decision, it is also realized that resistance to social change is of many types. Here we can say that jurisprudence, as a social science, has shared in the responsibility of determining the extent to which any desired social change is enforceable by law. Laws may be violated, and they may be evaded. Evasion 89 NO PAGE NUMBER LILES REBELS BIT BEE OT ID eRe ETL! RE aaiNn ten \ PONE YT PY ARERR STOR hig — carries the implication of driving a course through gaps in the law, if not actually breaking it. Important to the courts, to public order, and to the profession is the whole field of conflict of laws. Oftentimes, the change ordered by legal enactment and judicial decision is so limited in scope that no actual evasion is drawn upon to block social change. Some times modes of ad- justment may exist within the choice of individuals and groups—alternatives sanctioned in legal codes. It is in this borderline between public and private spheres of life that the doctrine of social change is of most im- portance to students of jurisprudence. It must be re- membered that issues will be decided, not on the basis of an assumed code of ethics, but on the basis of what ts enforceable within the system of legality.’’ (Italics supplied) BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY B. Plans for Integration The problem involves, among other things, the collective conscience or mores of our white citizens regarding segre- gation. That conscience simply stated, although of varying degrees of intensity, is that our people are not ready for desegregation. This was demonstrated conclusively by the survey which was made in Florida. This conscience is in- grained because it was nurtured and cherished throughout many generations as a way of life. It is deep-seated and its roots rest in fears of inter-marriage of the races, racial dif- ferences, superstitions, history, traditions and customs. This community conscience until the Brown case had long years of legal sanction in the field of public education. Elimination of this legal sanction by no means eradicates * the underlying collective conscience of the people in this field. This attribute of the problem simply cannot be suc- cessfully solved overnight. This the Court undoubtedly appreciated by not making its desegregation decision immediately effective. Its ques- tions and its delay of implementation indicate that it is conscious of what may be termed the equities of transition. The Court, we believe, is imbued with the need for gravity and for prudent concern in dealing with this collective con- science. We think it realizes the need for social engineering, time, patience and community understanding. It senses the need for conditioning and education if implementation is ever to be a real success, Free men are not automatuns capable of being molded 91 vane and transformed forthwith by a new and revolutionary judicial concept which does not square with their collective conscience. The enormity of the problem of compliance gives great pause. We do not deal with implementation of a decree against a single individual or even a minority. A successful response to the judgment requires reconciliation to it of a great majority of our people. The Court on its part needs for the enforcement of its decree the amelioration of time which is said to be a great Healer. It needs the rallying of those who will stand by the law of the land because it is such whether they agree with it or not and the patience of wise administration which eschews haste, precipitate action and premature procedures. The Court stands not in need of the whip and the scourge of compulsion to drive our people to obedience, but rather the rational solution of time in which the loyalty, patience and understanding of the law-abiding will come forward and lead the way to peaceful, reasonable and successful compliance. Not only to be consjdered is the need of reconciling this collective conscience to desegregation but others of im- portance to be considered include the safety of school chil- dren, the peace of the community, the mutitudinous admin- istrative problems affected, the impact upon teachers’ jobs, particularly Negro teachers’, the transportation of school children, the revisions of laws and regulations, the redis- tricting of attendance areas, the reallocation of physical school plant facilities and others involved in the transition from a segregated school system to a non-segregated system. All require time, wise administration and patience for their solution. Gradual effective adjustment to integration presupposes that there will be a plan. But because there is a wide variety of local conditions, no specific plan can be outlined which SEE AE Ge SRO UR WOO RTLE Es ae © IER PRONE AE ON We et BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY — would be acceptable under all conditions and in all com- munities. We think integration must proceed in Florida on a county by county basis because of the fundamental differences in various areas of the state which we have attempted to demonstrate in this brief. A great many plans for integration have been developed in Florida and other states and all of them have their ad- herents. A plan of gradual integration starting with the first grade and working on up through high school over a 12 year period is believed by some advocates to be the answer for their community but it is rejected in other places. Another plan for beginning the integration process at the college level and gradually working down to the first grade can be supported by valid arguments, but it too is rejected by many educational leaders as being unworkable in some communities. Other plans which have been advanced include a gradual reorganization of school attendance areas; designated schools whose students will be composed of volunteers from both races during the transition period; a simultaneous in- tegration of all school grades over a period of time based on the scholastic level of the students as determined by ex- aminations. These and many other plans are being consid- ered by school authorities whose job it will be in the final analysis to devise a plan which will be accepted and will work in their particular school districts. The one factor which all of these plans share in common is the need for sufficient time to carry them out and the one point on which agreement can be reached by school authorities who are willing to undertake a program of in- tegration is that the plan adopted for their specific area must be unique in that it will take into consideration the exact problems of that area and no other. = 93 Bi... If this planning and action is permitted by the Court, we believe that local school authorities should take into consideration two primary factors: first, the material aspects of integration which include the use of present school buildings, the construction of new buildings, trans- portation, teachers’ jobs and assignments, school popula- tions within attendance areas and the administration im- practicabilities and inequities that would arise in these dislocations in any effort to effect a too hasty non-segrega- tion; second, the intangible considerations including com- munity thinking, customs, mores, overt acts that might result from the impact of premature integration, the schol- astic standards of the schools and the feelings of children. We realize that objection has been made to gradualism in seeking methods of integrating white and Negro schools, that delay might tend to create feelings of hostility and encourage organized opposition. The advocates of this theory apparently feel that the shock treatment is to be preferred and that if a difficult job has to be done, the quicker it is done, the better. In this belief we are positive they are mistaken. Strong opposition already exists in the South to desegregation. It will be intensified in direct proportion to the amount of hasty precipitation and coercion that is applied. Already there is springing up in our state opposition organizations, some of which through their literature en- courage violence. Burning of crosses and circulation of hate literature are becoming more and more prevalent. But minimizing these manifestations of defiance are thou- sands of law-abiding citizens of both races, many influential newspapers and loyal organizations who are trying to meet the situation calmly and patiently. But their attitudes have always been buttressed on the assumption of gradualism and local autonomy. If that assumption is cut from under them by a decree of immediate desegregation or even a decree of a period of short delay which does not permit a 94 PESO RA ETS EME ILO RENEE ARETE ADIGE LP NTI RENE BN ALA MEAN IEIY F BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY large degree of local determination, we frankly doubt whether we can save our public school system. This ob- jection to gradualism may be valid in Northern states where segregation has been practiced but where the people as a whole do not share the intense feelings on racial differences which have become an ingrained part of the culture of the South. There is no reason to think that sufficient delay in integra- tion of the schools of Florida to allow for a period of gradual adjustment would create new problems or intensify those already existing. The problems are already here and must be recognized realistically by anyone conscientiously seeking a solution. There is every logical reason to believe that any attempt to use the shock treatment of immediate compulsory inte- gration of schools in Florida would only result in translat- ing the present passive intellectual differences in thought and emotional feelings to an active, positive and violent physical resistance. When all is said and done, it may be that about the best advice on the subject was contained in a speech by Gover- nor David S. Walker of Florida in 1867 to a meeting of Freedmen in Tallahassee’. Governor Walker said: ‘‘The great question now to be solved, is whether two different races can live in peace together under the same government with equal political rights. In my reading of history, I do not remember any instance in which this has ever been done. But God has placed the work upon us and with His blessing we must try our best to accomplish it. In the first place, therefore, I say let each one of us of all colors resolve to cultivate kindly relations with one another and never allow our- 1. Semi-weekly Floridan, Tallahassee, Florida, April 23, 1867, page 2. — 95 — selves to be arrayed in hostility to each other—let us always speak kindly to and of one another. I have never known a man in my life who had the true principles of a Christian gentleman in him, who would wantonly wound the feelings of any human being, however RAPS RNS ee PPAR t a NEAR WS ATR PARI TORT BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY Part Five CONCLUSION There are two ways in which the Brown decision may be viewed by history. First, it may be considered as a seismic shock which struck without warning and engulfed a large part of the nation in a tidal wave of hate and inflamed emotions and carried away a public school system which took half a century and billions of dollars to build, or Second, it may be looked upon as a high goal which this Court has fixed for men of good will to strive to attain and which they may attain in due course if rational considera- tion is given to human frailty and faith is maintained in the slow but sure upward movement of democracy. Many think that our democracy is now face to face with the toughest job in practical government it has ever had to tackle without going to war. Some way must be found to protect the constitutional rights of a minority without ignoring the will of the majority. We think the only an- swer is time and the patient efforts of those who value de- mocracy more than their personal longings and private prejudices. We hope that this court will accept this answer. Ricuarp W. Ervin Attorney General of the State of Florida Ratpu E. Opum Assistant Attorney General, State of Florida 97 (Appendix A) Results of a Survey of Florida Leader- ship Opinion on the Effects of the U.S. Supreme Court Decision of May 17, 1954 Relating to Segregation in Florida Schools ‘ 99 — sane Se ee oe eee Say NO PAGE NUMBER Introduction As a result of the decision of the United States Supreme Court of May 17, 1954, declaring unconstitutional racial segregation in public education, Florida and other southern states are confronted with problems of tremendous gravity and complexity. While it enunciated a new principle of law, the Court did not prescribe the manner in which this principle should be translated into action in the states and com- munities affected. Instead, it restored the cases to the docket for further argument as to the method of adjust- ment which should be called for in subsequent decrees, inviting the Attorneys General of states requiring or permitting segregation in public education to appear as amici curiae. In anticipation of the preparation of a brief for sub- mission in response to this invitation, the Attorney General of the State of Florida requested the assistance of social scientists and other educators in compiling facts concerning the problems which the State of Florida would encounter in complying with the decision of the Court. This is their report. RICHARD W. ERVIN Attorney General 101 —— AF SENET URGES RATE. en ee NO PAGE NUMBER aa ATTORNEY GENERAL’S RESEARCH ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR THE STUDY OF PROBLEMS OF DESEGREGATION IN FLORIDA SCHOOLS The committee was chosen by the Attorney General to assist him in conducting a survey to determine leadership opinion among Florida citizens regarding problems created by the U. S. Supreme Court’s decision of May 17, 1954, abolishing segregation in the public schools. The individuals asked to serve on this committee were chosen on the basis of their professional standing in the field of education; their specialized knowledge and train- ing which would be of value in conducting such a survey; and their reputation for civic-mindedness and impartiality. The committee selected Dr. Lewis Killian, Associate Pro- fessor of Sociology at Florida State University, to act as director of research and coordinator for the project. While certain parts of this report were written by Dr. Killian and others, the entire report and all its findings have been reviewed and approved by the entire membership of the committee. Mr. Richard W. Ervin Dr. Sarah Lou Hammond Attorney General School of Education (Ex Officio) Florida State University Mr. Thomas D. Bailey Mr. Robert D. Gates State Superintendent of Department of Education Public Instruction (Ex Officio) | 102 SE RENAL ANE SOE TSS UN NEAT 8 Ss SPENT ee See Te, BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY Mr. Ralph E. Odum Assistant Attorney General Dr. Ralph Eyman, Dean School of Education Florida State University Dr. Gilbert Porter Executive Secretary Florida State Teachers Association Dr. J. B. White, Dean School of Education University of Florida Dr. Manning J. Dauer Department of Political Science University of Florida Dr. Don Larson Department of Political Science University of Miami Dr. George Gore, President Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University Mr. Angus Laird, Director State Merit System Dr. Robert E. Lee Department of Education Mr. Ed Henderson Executwe Secretary Florida Education Association Dr. Richard Moore, President Bethune-Cookman College Dr. R. L. Johns School of Education University of Florida Dr. Mode Stone School of Education Florida State University Mr. D. E. Williams Department of Education Dr. T. J. Wood Department of Political Science Unwersity of Miami Dr. Lewis M. Killian Department of Sociology Florida State University (Coordinator of Research) 103 Fie 0 . The Report and the Conclusions* Just as the effects of segregation, held by the Court to be discriminatory, are essentially psychological, the prob- lems of desegregation are also social and psychological as much as they are legal. An eminent student of race relations in the South, Guy B. Johnson, has said, ‘‘ Anyone who thinks that the transi- tion from segregation to racial co-education can be made without problems, tensions, and even personal tragedies is a fool. Anyone who thinks that the transition means the end of cwilization is also a fool,’” The purpose of this study was to deliueate as far as is possible the problems, the tensions and, perhaps, the trage- dies, which might be expected to arise in the course of this transition in Florida communities. This was a fact finding, research study. There was no intent to predict whether this transition will take place nor to make value-judgments as to whether it should or should not occur. Prediction of the problems which might arise if desegre- gation of public schools were undertaken in the near future are hased upon four types of data. These are: * Prepared by Dr. Lewis Killian, Department of Sociology, Florida State University. 1. ‘‘The Impending Crisis of the South,’’ New South, VIII, No. 5 (May, 1953), (Atlanta: Southern Regional Council), 5. 105 NO PAGE NUNBER | Sa Diets 1. The expressed attitudes of various groups of leaders, both white and Negro, toward the Court’s decision and toward the possible implementation of it in Florida. 2. An historical analysis of the way in which Negroes have availed themselves of a privilege from which state restric- tions were removed by a similar federal court decision, the privilege of voting in primary elections. 3. An analysis of relevant information pertaining to school administration, instructional services, and the quality of education as they might be affected by desegregation. 4. The experience of other states and communities in which programs of desegregation have been undertaken. In the study of human behavior it is impossible to ask all of the questions which are relevant to that behavior. The selection of questions always implies certain assump- tions concerning the situation being studied, and these assumptions should be made explicit. The basic assumptions of this study are: 1, That the Court will desire a minimum of intergroup conflict and public disorder in any program of desegre- gation which might be undertaken. On this assumption, information indicative of the likelihood of conflict and widespread disorder in various situations becomes highly important. 2. That expressed attitudes are to some extent and in cer- tain types of situations indicative of later behavior. This is particularly important when it is the attitudes of occu- pants of key positions in the power structure of a group which are concerned. s 3. That the attitudes of people in leadership, power, and prestige roles are of more importance as determinants of 106 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY ‘ Lie BNO at “ a a te = PL AAG LIRR is eicaset tac s - A RR Be A i nasi SE social change than are the attitudes of larger numbers of people not occupying such roles. 4. That the behavior of people in one situation is to some extent indicative of the behavior of the same or different people in similar but not identical situations. The conclusions of this study are based on the findings of several separate, but related, constituent studies which, together, constitute the general research project. Each study is presented in detail in a separate subsection of the report. The general conclusions, drawn from all of these studies, are found in the chapter preceding the detailed reports of the separate studies. The sub-studies, in order of presentation, are: 1. An attitude-opinion poll, based on mailed questionnaires, of 9 white and 2 Negro groups of leaders throughout the state. (Page 113) 2. An attitude-opinion poll, based on personal inter- views, of white leaders in 10 selected counties and Negro leaders in 8 of these counties. (Page 133) 3. An historical analysis of trends in Negro voter regis- tration in Florida, 1940-1954. (Page 177) 4. An analysis of relevant information pertaining to school administration and instructional services as they might be affected by desegregation. (Page 185) 5. An intensive study, utilizing various methods, of lead- ership attitudes and opinions in a metropolitan area and a rural area in southeastern Florida. (Page 201) GENERAL CONCLUSIONS 1. On the basis of data from all relevant sources included in this study, it is evident that in Florida white leadership opinion with reference to the Supreme Court’s decision is far from being homogeneous. Approximately three-fourths 107 ee ae GMB akan LT a, ot the white leaders polled disagree, in principle, with the decision. here are approximately 3U per cent who violently disagree with the decision to the extent that they would re- fuse to cooperate with any move to end segregation or would actively oppose it. While the majority of white persons answering opposed the decision, it is also true that a large majority indicated they were willing to do what the courts and school officials decided. 2. A large majority of the Negro leaders acclaim the de- cision as being right. 3. Only a small minority of leaders of both races advocate immediate, complete desegregation. White leaders, if they accept the idea that segregation should be ended eventu- ally, tend to advocate a very gradual, indefinite transition period, with a preparatory period of education. Negroes tend to advocate a gradual transition, but one beginning soon and lasting over a much shorter period of time. 4. There are definite variations between regions, coun- ties, communities and sections of communities as to whether desegregation can be accomplished, even gradually, with- out conflict and public disorder. The analysis of trends in Negro registration and voting in primary elections, shows similar variations in the extent to which Negroes have availed themselves of the right to register and vote. At least some of these variations in voting behavior must be accounted for by white resistance to Negro political par- ticipation. This indicates that there are regional varia- tions not only in racial attitudes but in overt action. Regional, county and community variations in responses to questionnaires and interviews are sufficiently marked to suggest that in some communities desegregation could be undertaken now if local leaders so decided, but that in others widespread social disorder would result from immediate 108 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY —_ cia steps to end segregation. There would be problems, of course, in any area of the state, but these would be vastly greater in some areas than in others. 5. While a minority of both white and Negro leaders ex- pect serious violence to occur if desegregation is attempted, there is a widespread lack of confidence in the ability of peace officers to maintain law and order if serious violence does start. This is especially true of the peace officers them- selves, except in Dade County. This has important impli- cations. While it is true that expressed attitudes are not necessarily predictive of actual behavior, there seems little doubt that there is a minority of whites who would actively and violently resist desegregation, especially immediate desegregation. It has been concluded from the analysis of experiences with desegregation in other areas, ‘‘A small minority may precipitate overt resistance or violent oppo- sition to desegregation in spite of general acceptance or accommodation by the majority.’” 6. Opposition of peace officers to desegregation, lack of confidence in their ability to maintain law and order in the face of violent resistance, and the existence of a posi- tive relationship between these two opinions indicates that less than firm, positive action to prevent public disorder might be expected from many of the police, especially in some communities. Elected officials, county and school, also show a high degree of opposition. Yet it has been pointed out, again on the basis of experience in other states, that the accomplishment of efficient desegregation with a mini- mum of social] disturbance depends upon. A. A clear and unequivocal statement of policy by leaders with prestige and other authorities; 2. Kenneth B. Clark, ‘‘Findings,’’ Journal of Social Issues, IX, No. 4 (1953), 50. 109 a teed | B. Firm enforcement of the changed policy by authorities and persistence in the execution of this policy in the face of initial resistance ; C. A willingness to deal with violations, attempted viola- tions, and incitement to violations by a resort to the law and strong enforcement action; Pel edd Dash D. A refusal of the authorities te resort to, engage in or tolerate subterfuges, gerrymandering or other devices for evading the principles and the fact of desegregation ; E. An appeal to the individuals concerned in terms of their religious principles of brotherhood and their acceptance of the American traditions of fair play and equal justice. It may be concluded that the absence of a firm, eathusi- astic public policy of making desegregation effective would create the type of situation in which attitudes would be most likely to be translated into action.* 7. In view of white feelings that immediate desegregation would not work and that to require it would constitute a negation of local autonomy, it may be postulated that the chances of developing firm official and, perhaps, public sup- port for any program of desegregation would be increased by a decree which would create the feeling that the Court recognizes local problems and wil! allow a gradual tran- sition with some degree of loca] determination. 8. There is a strong likelihood that many white children would be withdrawn from public schools by their parents and sent to private schools. It seems logical, however, that this practice would be confined primarily to families in the higher income brackets. As a result, a form of socio-eco- nomic class segregation might be substituted for racial segregation in education. 4. Experience shows that when the steps listed above have been taken, predictions of serious social disturbance have not been borne out. f y BY 3 a a 4 4 a “ i » 4 a F; 110 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY PON A Be ae nN A Cac nes - ’ a a i ~ ” its Poe - — I NE Tilt a ae, oo , At EE ie BOE i i oe TABLE 8 PER CENT OF GROUPS POLLED WHO BELIEVE MOST OF OTHER SPECIFIED GROUPS DISAGREE WITH THE DECISION Specified Group Group and Most People Whitesin Negroes in Number® in Florida Community Community Principals and Sup. (W) 65.6" 73.0 25.1 (N-756) P.T.A. (W) 61.6 87.5 42.5 (N-375) Editors 59.3 69.5 _ (N-118) Radio Station Man. 43.6 72.3 = (N-54) Ceunty Officials 74.8? 80.8 47.8 (N-224) School Officials 75.7 85.5 52.5 (N-303) Legislators 69.1 78.6 39.1 (N-79) Ministers 48.6° 48.6 ied (N-101) Negro Principals 7.8 26.7 8.9 (N-180) P.T.A. (Negro) 16.3 37.2 15.1 (N-86) 1. N-770. 2. N-230. 8. N-309. *For ministers, this question asked how most of the members of their congregation felt. **This group not asked how Negroes as a separate group felt. 143 TABLE § PER CENT OF EACH GROUP DESIGNATING VARIOUS METHODS OF ENDING SEGREGATION AS MOST "EFFECTIVE METHOD No Group and Immedi- Very Other Infor- Number ate Gradual Gradual* mation Total _ Peace Officers 5 9.2 90.3? 100.0 _ (N-1669) Pripeipals and ; Sup. (W) 3.1 71.7 19.5 5.4 99.7 (N-771) [PTA(W) 43 651 137 41170 ~~» 1002 (N-375) ' Editors 5.1 60.2 19.5 15.3 100.1 4 2 (N-118) Radio Station Man. 14.8 46.3 25.9 12.9 99.9 _ (N-54) _ County Officials 5.2 49.1 16.0 29.6 99.9 ' (N-230) School Officials 4.9 62.8 9.7 22.6 100.0 (N-309) Legislators 11.4 49.4 17.7 21.5 100.0 (N-79) Ministers 5.9 47.5 33.7 12.9 100.0 (N-101) Negro Principals 9.8 31.6 55.7 2.9 100.0 (N-174) P.T.A. (Negro) 13.9 26.7 46.5 12.8 99.9 (N-86) & i ***Other gradual’’ includes ‘‘Keeping existing school boundaries for the time being, but immediately letting children who want to do so go to the closest school regardless of race,’’? and ‘‘A one or two year period of preparation before any schools are integrated.’’ 1. These peace officers gave no information or answered **Segre- gation should be kept.’’ 144 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY | ‘sda0yo voved 10} apeUL aq JOU p[NOd sUOTyBUIqUIOD aSaq], , : (98-N) VOL 981 Lor a" g91 €'8% (O4G9N) “WiL'd ' (O8T-N) ——— « Q'00T RL 68 Vl 6'é1 8°83 s[ediouttd 0150N (TOI-N) B01 6°33 6'81 6'8 8°61 162 8.109810 (6L-N) ; B01 0'8% Vor Ig SFE 8°SS 81078 [S130"] H (608-N) / 666 O'FE a oP €°&Z F'0E S[BIOIO [OOS : (O&Z-N) ‘LOO! SGP O'OL Ge €'8T 192 sjeiyQ Ayun0) > / (8L-N) 666 6°23 o'el gL 6'9T Ele S1OUPH { (CLE-N) | 666 10E g°G CP EZ G9 (M) “Wild | (TLL-N) 666 oor oor Vr 9° ove (M) ‘dng pure sjedroung : [R10] ‘JUy ON 0 12410 aBal[ON aBa][009 &-T «19qQUINN MOUY 4,U0q IV pue ¢-T sepely pue dnoiy THAAT AGVUp NOILYOauDASAd LUWLS OL JOW1d LSaISWA SY STIAZT AGWHS CaLUDIdS ONILWNSDISAG dNOUD HOA JO LNA wad Ol ATavL Dyed Ge. mate 2 COPY BOUND VERTICALLY ED 8°61 = ¥6F ens s]OOYY poxr{ Joy ysoddng xey, Jo you] —* gens 8°29 sheooe eenees suoljeorddy IIoRvaT, 0139N jo uoryoloyy eeeses 0 — ———~—~—«sCt ZoL covcce oocece S19YORIT, O71 MA Sui, ul Aynoygiq evcose —“(‘(‘(‘(itét €°2E ecccee ecccce SulUsIsey s[Rloygo JooTag 9ST wal ¥'£9 9'1¢ FCG spooqog o1qng WoIZ sayy AM JO [PMVIPYITM 9'8T Zsl 'F9 FOL TT9 sJOoyog e}Valig jo jueutdojeacq — PPI €°CZ — 9°%S SIVALIG sng Aq se013eN 0} SsourTeyUy Lu 9'0T 9°91 €°92 8'CT Sleqovey, O180N Aq ssoulrejyuy) 8°61 Lg £°S ZTE OLT S1eyoVay, e}IG Aq ssouriejuy eoeces Lit eccose = s—“‘(“‘é 9'8F SpIBpuByg o1WEpBRIy jo SULIOMO'T 60 Lg 299 6'S9 ZG sIeqovay, olsen Aq outdiosig eeccee 6¢e ecvcce eeccce Lot s1ayoeVay, ayy MA Aq eulfdisiq (98)(N) (O8T)(N) (g08) STeIOYO ($18) (AA) (TLL) (MA) dng Baly We[qoig Vid spedroullg jooyag Vid 9 syedioulig aSMdyY OL ATIMII ON SW SNATAOUd SNOIUVWA DNILWNDSISAC dNOUSD HOW JO INAS Wad Il FaWL PAY REIS PES IIT nite ina ares YEN Te Doel SNM IT AN, OD Nyy ba cet DIOR Fp os, , b 146 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY ill ie tia a NN ane le vas —— Wiles tat de NE AMEN TIEN Ae SI BSA BEL Be MINT ABA SIE aN ONO ATE Nts TABLE 12 CONFIDENCE OF PEACE OFFICERS IN ABILITY TO COPE WITH SERIOUS VIOLENCE, BY ATTITUDE TOWARDS DESEGREGATION* Belief that Police Could Maintain Order Attitude If Serious Violence Started They Could They Couldn’t Total Segregation should be kept 193 836 1029 Segregation should be ended, gradually or immediately 54 bt 118 r= +.45 * Peace officers who answered ‘‘Don’t Know’’ have been omitted from this table. TABLE 13 CONFIDEMCE OF PEACE OFFICERS THAT POLICE WOULD ENFORCE SCHOOL ATTENDANCE LAWS FOR MIXED SCHOOLS, BY ATTITUDE TOWARDS DESEGREGATION* Judgment of Willingness of Police to Attitude Enforee Attendance Laws They Would They Wouldn’t Total Segregation should be kept 151 796 947 Segregation should be ended, gradually or immediately 67 36 103 ean e * Peace officers who answered ‘‘Don’t Know’’ have been omitted from this table. 147 COPY BOUND VERTICALLY TABLE 14 5 PER CENT OF PEACE OFFICERS EXPRESSING VARIOUS 4 ATTITUDES, BY REGION ; Attitude Expressed ‘ Region Keep Desegregate Desegregate No } Segregation Gradually Immediately Inf. Total ; I 83.5 15.0 1.5 100.0 | (N-133) ; II 93.1 4.6 8 1.5 100.0 » (N-130) Il 86.7 12.0 1.2 99.9 (N-83) ; Iv 92.9 6.3 7 99.9 _— (N-269) a Vv 94.8 3.3 z 1.1 99.9 ) (N-269) ' VI 90.1 9.2 6 99.9 — (N-335) _ vu 100.0 100.0 ' (N-27) _ VII 83.4 > 14.2 9 14 99.9 ' (N-423) 4 3 148 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY TABLE 15 PER CENT OF WHITE PRINCIPALS AND SUPERVISORS AGREEING OR DISAGREEING WITH THE DECISION, BY REGION No Region Agree Disagree Neutral Inf. Total I (N-71) 53.5 42.2 1.4 28 99.9 II (N-151) 38.4 54.3 6.6 7 100.0 III (N-38) 60.5 36.8 2.6 99.9 IV (N-135) 47.4 46.7 3.7 2.2 100.0 V (N-99) 47.5 40.4 8.1 4.0 100.0 VI (N-117) 65.0 30.8 3.4 8 100.0 VII (N-30) 33.3 60.0 6.7 100.0 VIII (N-121) 71.9 20.7 5.0 2.5 100.1 TABLE 16 PER CENT OF WHITE PRINCIPALS AND SUPERVISORS WILLING OR UNWILLING TO COMPLY, BY REGION Would Would Not No Region Comply Comply Inf. Total I (N-71) 81.7 15.5 2.8 100.0 Il (N-151) 78.1 21.2 a 100.0 Ill (N-38) 78.9 21.1 ae 100.0 IV (N-135) 80.0 17.8 2.2 100.0 V (N-99) 84.8 11.1 4.0 99.9 VI (N-117) 94.0 5.1 8 99.9 VII (N-30) 76.7 23.3 sae 100.0 VIII (N-12:) 93.4 4.1 2.5 100.0 149 j : DY eee Ralntite oS Sa malian gD Aecesieteads ads Aaladl IONE aati syed RSet BORIS EE BER a BL PER CENT OF PEACE OFFICERS PREDICTING MOB VIOLENCE, BY REGION TABLE 17 —y Per Cent Predicting Region Mob Violence I (N-133) 33.8 II (N-130) 36.1 TI (N-83) 26.5 IV (N-269) 39.9 V (N-269) 31.2 VI (N-335) 27.5 VII (N-27) 63.0 VIII (N-423) 20.6 NUMBER AND PER CENT OF PEACE OFFICERS AND WHITE PRINCIPALS AND SUPERVISORS PREDICTING TABLE 18 SERIOUS VIOLENCE, BY REGION GROUP Region Principals and Peace Officers Supervisors No. Per Cent No. Per Cent I 75 56.4 20 28.2 U 81 62.3 55 36.4 I 39 47.0 10 26.3 IV 144 53.5 28 20.7 V 129 48.0 20 20.2 VI 159 47.5 16 13.7 VII 16 59.3 13 43.3 Vill 135 31.9 12 9.9 150 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY _— TABLE 19 NUMBER AND PER CENT OF PEACE OFFICERS AND WHITE PRINCIPALS AND SUPERVISORS DOUBTING THAT PEACE OFFICERS COULD COPE WITH SERIOUS VIOLENCE, BY REGION’ Principals and Region Peace Officers Supervisors Number’ Per Cent Number Per Cent I 105 78.9 53 74.6 II 109 83.8 111 73.5 Ti 74 89.2 27 71.1 IV 223 82.9 110 81.5 V 230 85.5 73 73.7 VI 265 79.1 76 65.0 VII 24 88.9 22 73.3 Vi 314 74.2 80 66.1 * Based on total of respondents who answered ‘‘No’’ or ‘‘Don’t Know’’ to question, ‘‘Do you think the peace officers in your community would be able to maintain law and order if serious violence is started ?’’ 151 Atay SS a TABLE 20 NUMBER AND PER CENT OF LEGISLATORS FAVORING EACH OF FIVE POSSIBLE COURSES OF LEGISLATIVE ACTION Course of Action Number Per Cent Legislation to preserve segregation in- definitely by whatever means possible 32 40.5 Legislation to preserve segregation for a few more years, contemplating even- tual integration but permitting time for development of public acceptance 8 10.1 Legislation permitting voluntary com- pliance with Court’s decision by local school officials, after consultation with patrons 4 5.1 Setting up legal machinery to permit gradual adjustment on a local option basis with provision for interracial committees, group discussions by school patrons and other means to bring about harmonious and peaceful compliance over a requisite period of time 18 22.8 No legislative action 10 12.7 No information given 7 8.8 Total 79 100.0 152 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY Leadership Opinion By Personal Interview ...and Conclusions* While the mail questionnaire method may produce a large volume of data in a short time, this method has many dis- advantages. One of the most important is the difficulty en- countered in analyzing the answers to open-ended questions, questions which the subject may answer in his own words. Another limitation is the difficulty encountered in reaching subjects who are not included on some mailing list, such as informal, non-official leaders in a community power struc- ture. Hence the mail questionnaire study of leadership opinion in the state was supplemented by a study of leader- ship opinion in 10 selected counties by the use of personal interviews. Selection of Counties. The 10 counties selected by the Research Advisory Com- mittee for intensive study included: Charlotte, Hillsborough and Pinellas, in the southwest coastal region; Orange and Lake, in the central, so-called ‘‘Ridge Section’’ of the * Prepared by Dr. Lewis Killian, Department of Sociology, Flor- ida State University. 153 tinted eT Bs aber eh att ae Te a a est 3 ha baniraz AE dN nites Pi hal Poe? tere peninsula ; Duval, in the northeast coastal region ; Lafayette, a rural, inland county in the the north central portion; Gadsden, a rural county in the northwest part of the state; and Washington, a rural county, and Escambia, an urban county, in the extreme northwest portion of the pan- handle of Florida. In the selection of these counties, the following factors were considered : 1. Representation of the different sections of the state. (The southeast section was not included because an inten- sive study was made in Dade County and nearby areas by the University of Miami). 2. Inclusion of both rural and urban counties. 3. Inclusion of counties with less than 10 per cent Negro population (2) or more than 50 per cent (1). The state has 5 counties in the former category and 2 counties in the latter. 4. Inclusion of certain counties which, on the basis of pre- liminary evidence, appeared to be areas of relatively high or relatively low resistance to desegregation. Method of Study. Interviews were conducted by 16 public school employ- ees from various counties, 12 white and 4 Negro principals or supervisors. No interviewer was assigned to work in his home county. For unavoidable practical reasons, no inter- views with Negro subjects were obtained in two counties, and in three other counties only a limited number were ob- tained, these by white interviewers. The interviewers, all carefully chosen for the task, were given one day of intensive training in the selection of sub- jects for interview, interviewing techniques, and interview recording. A schedule consisting of thirteen open-ended questions, similar to the structured questions used on the 154 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY _——— mail questionnaire and supplemented by suggested probing questions, was furnished. The interviewers were also given a list of community leaders, official and non-official, whom they should attempt to interview. It should be noted that the field workers were instructed to follow the advice of local informants in selecting subjects, both white and Ne- gro, considered to be important figures in the power struc- ture of the community. Each interviewer wrote, at the completion of his field work, an independent analysis of the situation in the county he studied. In addition, a content analysis was made of all interviews by a team of eight analysts, four white and four Negro, from the State Department of Education, the Florida A. and M. University, and the Florida State Uni- versity. In this apalysis the interviews were coded for IBM tabulation. After analysis and coding were com- pleted, approximately one-half of the interviews were coded for two items a second time by another member of the team, white and Negro members exchanging interviews. A reliability check on these items revealed a high degree of reliability between ratings by separate analysts, indicating that personal and racial biases in the interpretation of the interview protocols were slight. Findings. Interviews were obtained from a total of 460 white sub- jects and 195 Negro subjects. Of the white subjects, 263 were official leaders (County, city and school officials, judges, peace officers, and schoo] employees) and 197 were non-official leaders (business, professional, civic club, re- 1. Statistical analysis of the interview data was done in the Sociology Research Laboratory of the Florida State University, under the direction of Prof. Robert McGinnis and Dr. John M. Haer. Responsibility for the interpretation of the results is as- sumed by the Research Advisory Committee. ‘ 155 ge ligious, labor, youth). There were 42 Negro subjects who were school employees, and 153 non-official Negro leaders, including a large number of insurance men, undertakers, and independent business men. Distribution of the interviews by counties, for Negro and white, are shown below: cso | County White Negro 3 Charlotte 34 None } Duval 47 31 4 Escambia 40 64 j Gadsden 27 7 5 Hillsborough 79 43 % Lafayette 20 None x Lake 43 7 ¥ Orange 47 21 4 Pinellas 90 13 F Washington 33 9 z On the basis of statistical analysis of the interviews and i the impressions reported by the field staff, the findings indicated below were reached. Although a different method of study was used, these findings do not differ significantly from those of the questionnaire study. These findings are: : i 1. The majority of white subjects (67.7 per cent) are in disagreement with the decision, but only 4.1 per cent of the ; Negroes interviewed disagreed. Even white subjects who thought the decision was right 4 expressed, for the most part, fear that violence would occur . if desegregation were not worked out gradually or if, in the words of some, ‘‘it is crammed down our throats.”’ Some whites violently opposed to the decision made such statements as, ‘‘The decision is an outrage; it is wrong and will never work,’’ and ‘‘These colored children should be treated in such a way that they would not want to come back to school.’’ Ce ee Ce ee 156 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY On the other hand, a Negro interviewer summarized the opinions of Negroes in one county in the words, ‘‘God is behind the court’s decision. He will see that it is carried out, but he doesn’t want us to hasten,’’ and in another coun- ty in the words, ‘‘This problem should have been met squarely years ago. There is no need attempting to cir- cumvent, but settle the problem once and for all instead of passing it into the laps of our children.’’ 2. Slightly less than half (45.7) per cent of the whites indicated that they would not cooperate with the decision of the courts or local school officials as to how to effect desegregation, only 16 per cent indicating that they would actively oppose attempts to end segregation. Caution must be exercised in inferring that a major seg- ment of the white leadership represented here would ‘‘go along’’ with any plan for desegregation, regardless of its nature. It must be considered that many informants may have been indicating willingness to comply with what they thought the courts and, particularly, the school officials would do, but not with anything that they might possibly decide. 3. One reason given by white subjects for disagreement with the decision was that it is a violation of ‘‘states’ rights’’ and, in effect, a negation of local autonomy. 4. White leaders are almost unanimously opposed to any immediate steps to end segregation in their communities, only 4 out of 460 favoring such steps. 5. Of the Negro leaders, only 28.2 per cent favor immediate ending of all segregation in public education in their com- munities, but 58.9 per cent believe that the transition should begin within the next three years. 6. Whites and Negroes differ sharply in their assessment of white community opinion on the decision, 77 per cent of the white leaders believing most of the white people in their r . ™ 157 Sy ys ae communities disagree with the decision, but only 25.1 per cent of the Negroes believing this. ’ 7. Whites and Negroes differ sharply in their assessment f of Negro opinion in their communities, 54.3 per cent of the " white leaders believing that most Negroes disagree with the i decision, but only 6.1 per cent of the Negro leaders believ- ing so. fs 8. While only 30 per cent of the whites believe that even 5 a few Negro children could be admitted now to a previously i all white school without resulting violence, 76.4 per cent of the Negroes believe that this could be done without causing violence. j 9. Of the subjects answering the question (210 white, 82 Negro), a majority of Negroes (89 per cent) believe that peace officers could and would maintain law and order if violence started, but only 46.7 per cent of the whites believe this. A great many subjects in both groups did not answer this question. Be Pea Ree 5 i IST Sp 10. While many white leaders seem to expect trouble and even violence to occur if desegregation is attempted, there was no definite group or category of people which was specified by more than 10 per cent of the respondents as being likely to cause this trouble. 11. White leaders designated the primary grades and the colleges and universities most frequently as the best place to start desegregation if it were undertaken (primary— 31.7 per cent; college—13.3 per cent; both—8.5 per cent) but Negro leaders designated all grades from primary through high school most often (32.3 per cent). 12. Specific problems other than violence which might arise from desegregation were identified by a greater proportion of whites than of Negroes, although only a minority of each group designated any given eventuality as a likely prob- lem. The problems most often designated by whites were: getting white teachers to teach in mixed schools; using Negro teachers in mixed schools; maintaining discipline on school busses and in classes; getting white parents to wal s BLURRED COPY RE TSP OA OAR cls RI UE oan din BLEED THROUGH _— send their children to mixed public schools; keeping pres- ent academic standards; and getting tax support for mixed schools. 13. In no county does it appear that more than a small segment of whites is ready to accept immediate and abrupt desegregation. In two counties, however, a majority of the white leadership interviewed (in one, 59.5 per cent, in the other, 72.4 per cent) believe that desegregation can be accomplished peacefully and effectively if it is done over a period of years, with a preparatory program of educa- tion, and at a rate determined by the local citizens. 14. In one county, the high frequency of belief among white leaders that segregation should be kept, that violence would result from desegregation, and that peace officers could not cope with such violence, makes it appear very likely that conflict and disorder would result if an attempt to start desegregation by any means was undertaken even within from five to ten years from the present. 15. Inspection of the interview protocols and the reports of the field staff reveal that even within counties there is wide variation in readiness by whites of different commun- ities to accept desegregation. ln one county there is one community in which both Ne- gro and white leaders fear serious violence, in which or- ganized, violent opposition to desegregation is anticipated, and in which, indeed, organized but peaceful opposition has already appeared. In the same county is a community in which, in the judgment of both white and Negro interview- ers, gradual but effective desegregation could be accom- plished in the next few years. Similar situations exist in all but two of the counties, both predominantly rural but differing in region and proportion of Negroes in the population. 16. Concrete suggestions for effective first steps towards gradual desegregation offered by subjects include a period of education preparatory to the first steps, and the work- ing together in interracial committees of adults who would study together the problems confronting their community. 159 eT iets SI LE IRA OPTRA EE CRG EREE RS LOEB ELS AHS SIBLE SAME abt a Di A EMR Ts Sis i is EPL COMET, THE PERSONAL INTERVIEW SCHEDULE Position : How Selected: 1. Just what do you understand the Supreme Court de- cision to mean? 2. How do you feel about the decision? Probing: Feel it was right? Feel it was wrong? Feel it was neither right nor wrong—just not sure? If right, Not at this time? We need time? We should try to end segregation immediately? If wrong, Should cooperate because it is the law? Will not cooperate in ending segregation? Will actively oppose the action? If neutral, Will do whatever the courts and school officials say? 3. How do you think most of the people of Florida feel about it? 4. How do you think most of the people of this commun- ity feel about it? Probing: How do white people feel about it? How do colored people feel about it? 5. Do you think there are any people in this community who feel differently about this? If yes, probing: How do they feel about it? What kind of people are they? (General descriptive terms) Are they organized in any way? 169 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY ww What kinds of things do you think they would do to put across their viewpoint? 6. Now, suppose the local school board decided in the next few years that it had to let a few colored children who lived in a mostly white attendance area go to the near- est school. What dc you think would happen? Probing: What would people in this community do? Would anyone try to keep them from attending the school? If so, who would they be? (Not by name—just a gen- eral description) What kinds of things would they do? Who would be the leaders? Who would participate? Would the existing law enforcement staff of this community be able to prevent violence from occur- ring? Under what conditions would they be able to prevent violence, and under what conditions would they not be able to? 7. Now, suppose that in the next few years a few colored persons in your county applied for admittance to a white school and a court ordered that they be admitted. What do you think would happen? Probing: What would people in this community do? What would the school board do? (Admit them im- mediately? Try to fight the court order? Resign?) If they decided to admit them, would anyone try to keep them from attending school? (Continue as in question 6) 8. Suppose the local school board decided that it had to let all children go to the school nearest their home. What do you think would happen? Probing: (Same as for question 6) 9. If segregation in the schools were done away with in the next few years, what problems do you think would come up? . 161 RE LOR Saha SS eas HEINE ENE eae salon 0 See ees og WEL Rs en) aha SRR Bk! A MSU ii el ea iS Probing: In the employment of white teachers? In the employment of colored teachers? In transportation of children to school? In getting public support for school finance pro- grams? In keeping order among the children in the classroom and on the playground? In getting parents, white and colored, to send their children to mixed schools? In getting fair treatment by teachers of all children regardless of race? In keeping high teaching standards in the schools? 10. What ways can you suggest for handling any of the problems you have mentioned? 11. Suppose public school segregation had to be ended sooner or later. What do you think would be the best way to do it? Probing: There just isn’t any way? Assign all children to school on the basis of geo- graphical location immediately? Keep present school boundaries at first and let chil- dren who want to do so go to the closest school? Have a one or-two year period of preparation before any steps are taken to end segregation? Try to work it out over a period of years? 12. If it had to be done in the next few years, in what grades do you think it would be easiest to start admitting col- ored and white to the same schools? 13. Is there anything I haven’t touched on in my questions which you would like to comment on? Personnel Interviewed A. Leaders (Officials) County Commissioners, Chairman Mayor or City Manager Sheriff Chief of Police 162 BLEED THROUGH BLURRED COPY _— County Judge County Solicitors Superintendent of Schools County Health Officer County Board of Public Instruction, Chairman County Schoo] Trustees, Chairman County Commissioners City Commissioners Deputies Police Officers Cireuit Judge State Attorney Judge, Court of Criminal Record County Board of Public Instruction, Members County School Trustees, Members B. Leaders (Non-officials) School principals School supervisors Teachers PTA leaders Women’s Club leaders Chamber of Commerce president Civie and Veterans’ organizations leaders Newspaper editor or publisher Bankers Lawyers Doctors Realtors Labor union leaders Undertakers Insurance men Leading business men Directors, housing projects Other leaders designated by respondents as: (1) Being in a position to know what people in the com- munity are thinking and doing. (2) [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386408_0043%3A20. Public record. Not legal advice.