SRC Staff Report on Work Related to North Carolina

    SRC STAFF REPORT ON WORK RELATED TO NORTH CAROLINA

In a step toward assisting in the publication of a documented

history of involvement by the State of North Carolina in racial
discrinination, SRC has searched some of its early research library
newsclip and materials fi1e. Our focus is for the most on the

areas of voting and school desegregation. Although we are concentra-

ting on the period of the last two decades, w€ are also reaching

back to the late 1940's period. Our ain is to give a flavor of

the kinds of documentation that is available from the sources at hand.

One approach involves identification and documentation of the

rnotives of themes and techniques of race discrimination that go

over time and are even yet employed. We are presently exploring

several of these themes; they are briefly described in the para-

graphs below. Some of the kinds of documentation that have been

located in SRC research materials is attached. (This is, of course,

a very tentative identification of themes and techniques. )

1. Tokenisn, the school desegregation device (also visible
in othe-f'Ufffi) which for nearly a decade preserved North
Carolinars image of moderation and compliance with the 1aw
and protected it against court requirements of numerically
significant or blanket desegregation, meanwhile holding the
numbers of black children in school with whites well below
other states of the mid-South.

Z. Local Option and Other Vehicles Permitting or Encouraging
Local

tate policy that allowed a 1oca1 school
district to desegregate or to close schools should school inte-
gration be ordered. But there were other ways in which North
Carolina threw decisions to localities so as to permit or
encourage racial discrimination; for present purposes we are
grouping them with "loca1 option." For example, in 1955, in
response to the School decision, the state decentralized



')

control of its public schools, passing all educational
decisions to 1ocal districts. DecentraLization was generally
interpreted as a way of playing for time; it introduced the
necessity of district-by-district court challenges and
extensively burdened potential plaintiffs (as described below).
It also permitted loca1 districts to discriminate and perpetuate
segregation (by means of pupil transfer policies, by
school boundary and attendance zone gerrymandering, etc.),
at the same time absenting the state from responsibility.
In a second exanple, the state has adopted policies on more
than one occasion that empower 1oca1 authorities to discriminate
and give them a mechanisn with which to do so. Cases in point
include the N.C. Pupil Placement Act of 1956 (which created a
set of ZZ points of pupil transfer criteria to be subjectivtl)l
applied by^ 1ocal sch6oi boards) and the N. C. literarjr-EitT?
voter registration (which required prospective registrants to
satisfy the local registrar with his or her reading of a section
of the state constitution. )

3. Policies that extensively burden and discourage those
seekin laYed

cess by requiring placenent decisions on
a pupil by pupil basis; the processes of seeking transfers
under the Act and or appealing trransfer refusals placed vast
burdens of tirne and money on those seeking transfer. Similarly,
as noted above, the decentralization of North Carolina schools
in 1955 meant that desegregation cases must henceforth be brought
district-by-disctrict, incurring exhorbitant costs and vast
expenditures of time. The potential for intinidation and other
pressures against plaintiffs was considerably increasedd by
such policies.
4. Policies and Actions Directed toward Deliberatel Creat in
a Climate of opinion to Dromote resistance to integrat on an
Dromote racial discriminatlon and exclusron.

5. Omission of Leadership to End segregatio
Racial

Four and Five are self-explanatory.

Documentation of the state's motives in following these policies

is sometimes available; it

avoidance of reference to

is not abundant, of course, for the

race and the elimination of overtly



discriminatory policies were the centerpiece of the state's
policy, for the purpose of avoiding court orders producing wide-

spread desegregation or rights for blacks. Thus, public pronounce-

ments by state officials were as rare as were codified references

to motives of racial discrimination.

A few items we have unearthed (some of them from outside

commentators; state officials) appear below.

The notives of Tokenism.

a. "Kenneth Whitsett head of the pro-segregation-

ist Patriots of North Carolina, has stated that he was told by Colonel

Willian T. Joyner of the Governor's Committee on Schools that the

rrsacrifice of some children to mixed schools must be made so that

many other children will not siurilarly be subjected to the evils

of mixed scirools." This statement was appropos of forthcoming

voluntary integration, for the first time, in the schools in

Winston Salem, Charlotte, and Greensboro, N.C. in fa11, 1957, ad-

rnitting a total of 11 black children to predominately white schools.

The "Governor's Committee on Schools" was the Pearsall Committee,

the state advisory committee that designed N.C.ts laws related to

school desegregation. Joyner was its vice chairman, &t least for

a time.

.SRC SPECIAL REPORT ON CHARLOTTE, GREENSBORO, AND WINSTON-

SALEl"l, N.C. 9/4/57. Pp. Z-3.

b. "Dr. Robert F. Durden, Duke University Department

of History said token integration has been called 'a magnificent

1.



device for evasionr. . ."
-SOUTHERN SCHOOL NEWS, August, 1959, p. 15.

c. Moderate North Carolina gubernatorial candidate

Terry Sanford, rrcontending that he is personally a segregationist

and that the Supreme Court is distasteful to him, says that court

orders under the (School) decision must be obeyed. He argues that

North Carolina has had only limited desegregation by leaving the

issue up to 1ocal school districts. And Sanford contends the

staters course has also staved off any desegregation in the black

belts of eastern North Carolina where the race issue is strongest..."

-WASHINGT0N P0ST, 6/24/60. In 1960 campaign, Sanford

ran against former state Asst. Attorney General BeVerly

Lake, who vigorously attacked North Carolinafs token

integration as too permissive of integration.

d. President of the State Bar Association Newe11

Edenfield called for repeal of all of Georgiafs segregation laws,

saying that they hamper rather than help in the fight to preserve

segregation. Enphasizing that he was speaking as a segregationist,

he says that in states where segregation laws exist, there is no

!,onceivable situation in which a school board can win, but that in

North Carolina and Alabama, where there are no state segregation

laws, Negroes have consistently lost their appeals for blanket

relief. "Without segregation laws, plaintiffs cannot sue for



desegregation in a class action and because of this, he said,

defendants get I fringe benefits I such as having to face only one

adversary at a time, and not having to start with a blanket federal

inj unction. "
--SOUTHERN SCHOOI NEWS, July, 1960, p. 9.

e. I'Its (token integrationrs) intention is to placate

both 1aw and community custom. Its success has caused some of the

old adherents of nassive resistance to see it as an even more

effective method of avoiding the law."

--Southern Regional Council: A REPORT 0N SCHOOL DESEGRE-

GATIoN FOR 1960-61. Dunbar et al. pp. L9-20.

f. "An unhappy handful of colored children, not to be

more and wanting out, is to be preferred over closing our schools."

--Pro-segregation syndicated columnist John Temple Graves,

as quoted in A REPORT ON SCHOOL DESEGREGATION FOR 1960-61, cited above.

g. "If it (token integration) is forced on some of us

we should neither despair nor commit rash acts in our anger. . . If a

few Negro children are forced into scattered white schools, that

does not mean they will be there indefinitely. Once the pressure

groups find that rnassive integration is being denied them by the -

courts, their incentive will be du11ed. It will become ever more

difficult t,o recruit Negro parents willing to let their children

become martyrs for a dubious cause..."
--Thomas Waringr pro-segregationist editor of the

Charleston News and Courier, quoted in source above.



h. "The term (tokenism) is generally used to describe

deliberate efforts to keep racial integration at a minimun. . . token

integrat,ion has essentially the same goal as massive resistance; it >:.".

seeks to preserve, in effect, the established pattern of segregation.

Thus it differs from gradual desgregation which urges a slow pace

in the process of changing the segregated pattern, but which

at the same time envisions the elinination of segregation eventually. .'."

--TOKEN DESEGREGATION AND BEYOND: Mor land, Kenneth.

S.R.C., June, 1963.

i. "...Token plans are designed to neet the demands

of the Supreme Court by allowing some integration while sti1l
keeping the nunber of Negroes in school with Whites at such a low

level as to maintain de facto segregation. Token integration, then,

is an end to itself an end to which the established Patterns of

segregation prevail. "
- - rbid.



p6l, :d ,, 
I_,Pry.\rffiJll, 'l I

j S ,,Author.s and advocates of llanI pnovrgrrg ror tokel_l.l:g::11",

hsa, WZ

f,-.t " mad.e tt clear their hope that \such plans can prevent sizable
change. Fon example, consider the \anguments used in support of
Nonth Canolinars iupil Placement A+ f of 1955, which,, ineluding locaI1 S rt.l.PJ-! rlqesrrrvrru ..-l' 

^ 
v^ , r!"---'t)-

option and tnansfer provisions, "otltitutes a plan for/token i"t:gration
MonIand, Kenneth: TOkEN DESEGREGATTpU nUO BEYOND. southern Reeionaf
council and Anti-Defamation League Ft VI.il B.:Ri:l'^1:l::_1s6'y{I UOUnCI-I ancl AnII-UeIaIItdLf (Jlr lEdBus PL ty', trql' u - - l, v \

-f H=:= ::= =..5L^* "=::! 
€.E6 +h.e 

".=h::t-of 
the North Carolina # 

I

^lliift?iGfry committee on Educatioi) unling-a{gntion of the Pral'T/h"?:
(rr5q : : :' :J : ; : : { I ; : H I : " :, : I . !f Hl! SdkE"ffi';g444ag !*' I I :' 

r a'! i' n

(r{ ' n"oo"a of the Nor:th carpfina Adf,isory Committee on Education, Apnir 5, l9
\r' isio, to the Governor* General Assembly, State'Board of Education,

and County and local School Boards of North Canolina (at VoI' I, No' 3'
pp. 58I-586, Race Relations Law Reponten)1 @

---rrThe educational system of North Canolina has been buil-t on
the foundation stone of separation of the races in the schools. . .

The decisions of the Supneme Court have destnoyed our foundation
on segregation requined by law...defiance of the Supneme count
would be fooIhandY... / i / tdl6{ /u A{ /vt /
l|,t/tl/6nd/fiHt ..."An administrative body )tfiy welI find
that under locai conditions it may not be feasible or best for
a panticulan child to go to a Particulan school with childnen
of ar{Bohen race. A colon ban by 6ild law is one thing. A factual
tocai Xonaition bar, even if color is one of the causes of the
condition, is a diffe::ent thing...We believe that members of
each race pnefen to associate 5r{B} dil.J"" membens of their nace
and that they wiII do so naturally unless they are prodded and
inflamed and contnolled by outside pressure" 'tt ^ \

---rrWe are of the unanimous opinion that the people of Nor{i$,/
Carolina wilI not suPport mixed schooIs...The decision of the
Supreme Count of the United States,howeven much we dislike it,
is the declared law and is binding upon us. We think that the
deeision was erroneous; that it was a reversal of established
faw...that it could cause more harm within the United States
than anything which has happened in fifty yeans...(but it must
stand) until thene is a correcting constitutional amendment or
until the Court cor:re cts its own erlror. . . Def iance of the Supreme
Court would be foolha::dy. Definance would alienate those who may

be won to our thinki.g, that separateness of the races is natural
and best...We think ii is...true that children do best when in
school with children of their own race. We think that in the 

1

course of time that will be plain to.everyone...Thete -sh;)l!!./
be recognized the fact that there is no legal compulsf1otI on

any one to mix the races...we are proposing the building of a

new school system on a new foundation--a foundation of no racial
segregation LV 1aw, but assignemnt acconding to natural racial
preference ".,d the administrative determination of what is best

fon the chiId...rl
The Committee recommended that itre Legislature submit to a vote consti-
tutional amendments Providing fon tuition gnants and Iocal ogtion to

suspend i[y majority "t!q the openation of the P]bIic schools in that:;i:- ,tlo^..1 ,.:i{il n ?"CcE) ,}n-rQ.e^+,r, tr".-p; t

L; sl,f r ir.l.t\ f": .$rni $,t 
1 , 'i i i

-\l 
I

'+,mi0,



6.
NOTE: ri€n

Some fu additional quotes have been Iocated, in
file matenial.

Unfortunately, SRC newsclips fon the yean I96O nild/Adldild/t{d/
thnough the mid-Sixties do not include North Carolina {dfitl news
p"p""". Nor"thCy' CAnolina papers were discontinued during this peniod
of time. Fon the !A{d/ years 1955-about 1958, however, we do
have *1dd/tdtdtdtd/tt/ newsclips from d/'tldd/ sevenal Nonth Carolina
papers (because d these papers were furnished us by *d{ll\/Cdl6/
staff mem-be-rs ."I8.[..tLNorth C;ry1ina natives ) .

i[ftu.t
Tion t g,f those quotes, we will continue

;;;;';;; ;#""" identified on {ddd /t/ pp. 1 and

tdi/ proceeding with Local 0ption, Policies Burdening Those Seeking
Deseguegation, Creating a Climate to Disconuage and Prothote

istance to Integration, and 0mission of Leadership to End -g-tregation and Atdld/yldldilCd DeaI l{ith RaciaI Viole nce, 4Y

=-- a-tLAdditional)fr.ions of
of government-involvemen t

our report will deal with other aspects
in racial discrimination.

-\, h*r}-s',,L

Res