-
Title
-
EWP 1 1939 Daily
-
EWP 1939 Daily
-
Tag
-
legal, document, District Court, United States, 1939, case, colored principal, Walter Mills, Board of Education, Anne Arundel County, salaries, discrimination, race, color, injunction, equal rights, Maryland
-
Place
-
Virginia
-
Identifier
-
1000662
-
Is Version Of
-
1000662_EWP_1939_Daily.JPG
-
1000662_EWP_1939_Daily.pdf
-
Is Part Of
-
Uncategorized
-
Date Created
-
2024-01-07
-
2024-07-22 19:26:26 +0000
-
Format
-
Jpeg Image
-
Pdf Document
-
Number
-
9bee23609fb6f3337b25fb51c86b2603ec04478e6d9f55754058dcf52db0191e
-
d45b41d6cae3ae37bf60e94514881006038084f1cf95c60b3304d77ee03d8f99
-
29da38f653cb660c79eaf4aad7af728c115d914cff26d66b7d11d2ee11d934aa
-
Source
-
/Volumes/T7 Shield/EWP/Elements/EWP_Files/Access Files/Upload temp/1000662_EWP_1939_Daily.JPG
-
/Volumes/T7 Shield/EWP/Elements/EWP_Files/Access Files/jpg to pdf/need to upload or replc files to omeka/1000662_EWP_1939_Daily.pdf
-
Publisher
-
Digitized by Edwin Washington Project
-
Digitized by Edwin Washingon Project
-
Rights
-
Loudoun County Public Schools
-
Language
-
English
-
Replaces
-
/Volumes/T7 Shield/EWP/Elements/EWP_Files/source/Ingest One/1 Civil Rights/LCPS_African_Educ_Folder/EWP_1939_Daily.JPG
-
extracted text
-
. .
e
THE DAILY RECORD, BALTIMORE, TUESDA
District Court Of The United States
DISTRICT OF MARYLAND.
Civil Docket No. 170. ]
Filed November 22, 1939.
WALTER MILLS, PLAINTIFF,
VS.
BOARD OF EDUCATION OF ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, A CORPORA-
TION, AND GEORGE FOX, AS COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT
OF SCHOOLS OF ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, DEFENDANTS.
Thurgood Marshall, Leon A. Ransom, William H. Hastie, W. A. C.
Hughes, Jr., Charles Houston and Edward D. Lovett for complainant.
William €. Walsh, Attorney-General of Maryland; H. Vernon Eney, )
Assistant Attorney-General of Maryland, and Noah A. Hillman for de-
fendants.
{'onstitutional Law—Fourteenth Amendment of Constitution—Equal Protection
of the Laws—Bill for Injunction Against Discrimination As to Salary of
School Teachers Because of Race or Color—Injunction Granted.
CHESNUT, District Judge—
This case is a natural sequel to that} purposes of comparison it will be suffi-
of Mills vs. Lowndes et al., in this Court,| cient to take the case of white and
26 F. 8. 792. In that case the samecolored teachers respectively who have
plaintiff, who is a colored school teacherl a first grade rating and nine years or
employed by the Board of qucation|more experience. In 1904 the first mini-
of Anne Arundel County, of the State|mum salary act for white teachers
of Maryland, sued the State Board of| (there being none at all for colored
colored principal at $995; but in prac-
tice the County Board in many cases
actually pays higher salaries to the
prircipals of schools, in consideration
of particular conditions and capacities
of the respective principals. Thus the
plaintiff’s salary for the current year
has bBeen fixed at $1,058, or $103 more
than the minimum, and in the case of
three white principals, mentioned in the
evidence, the salary is $1,800 per year,
or $250 more than the minimum. The
'defendants contend that the materially
higher salaries of these three white
teachers of schools comparable in size
to that of which the plaintiff is a prin-
cipal is due to the judgment of the
Board that the three white principals
have superior professional attainments
and efficiency to that of Mills;* but it
s to be importantly noted that these
personal qualities, while explaining
greater compensation to the particular
individuals than the minimum county
scale for the particular position, do not
account for the difference between
$1,058 only received by Mills and the
minimum of $1,550 which by the Coun-
ty scale would have to be paid to any
white principal of a comparable school.
Or, in other words, if Mills were a
white principal he would necessarily
receive according to the County scale
not less than $1,550 as compared with
his actual salary of $1,058.
The plaintiff has filed this suit not
Educanon to secure an equahza ion of teachers pl‘lOI‘ to 1918) prescrlbed a
ageath SRR PR iie a2 L. Sl CW R e bRl ) o S B N
only individually but on behalf of other
I e R U B R L R U e KLl SN
ment to pay n
to any white
merits it, prov
is not solely
color.
I do not find
to expressly
minimum statv
necessarily on
because it is th
than the mer
which prejudic
are practical a
School Board
statute, as it t
to participate
zation Fund p
fully explainec
former case. "
less expensive
to raise the col
iiinimum of th
teachers than
with and lose f
zation Fund. '
to bring the co
the statutory
teachers will
$45,000, while
receiving abo
Equalization F
$45,000 will m
additional on
rate for school
mindful of the
tion which is
County, as has
T P 4 ah co. ) rm
