-
Title
-
EWP 1 1939 Daily (2)
-
EWP 1939 Daily (2)
-
Tag
-
novel, legal, questions, equal pay, teachers, races, discriminatory, history, Fourteenth Amendment, salary disparities, racial equality
-
Place
-
Virginia
-
Identifier
-
1000663
-
Is Version Of
-
1000663_EWP_1939_Daily_(2).JPG
-
1000663_EWP_1939_Daily_(2).pdf
-
Is Part Of
-
Uncategorized
-
Date Created
-
2024-01-07
-
2024-07-22 19:26:26 +0000
-
Format
-
Jpeg Image
-
Pdf Document
-
Number
-
ce31b2e88075196cffbf22475ad94f8feb6a4e408934858f7061cd83f07b5a2f
-
1b6ab14da58d0d5a8b2494001bed1967c4e50ebe991edaff52d537da27a23046
-
7ef5b406570b00c812c1215dc3ee2b74b484535038626dc0d144367606a46df1
-
Source
-
/Volumes/T7 Shield/EWP/Elements/EWP_Files/Access Files/Upload temp/1000663_EWP_1939_Daily_(2).JPG
-
/Volumes/T7 Shield/EWP/Elements/EWP_Files/Access Files/jpg to pdf/need to upload or replc files to omeka/1000663_EWP_1939_Daily_(2).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_(2).JPG
-
extracted text
-
—— T ST VAN 4O
170Y
v 2 colore inci 5. i
VIstrict A\.Q:HH cm H‘—.—O :5_—”6& mflm—uflm oo ,%m@mw:%%&mw mwwm.: but In prac-|188at to pay more than the minimum colored teachers in Anne Arundel Coun- LEGAL NOTICES.
actually pays uw.iums. .. raany casestafiany white or colored teacher who ty solely on account of race or color
Dih Primof oum mowuw&mw mmm_mfimmm HM awwm Merits it, provided the discrimination and my finding from the testimony is Fourth Imsertion.
TRICT OF MARYLAND. of particulay aoz%mm:mzmmM:ww %M:w zw_m %Howon Solely on account of race or that this question must be answered in Edward P. Sm_flmamflaw Solicitor,
OF P h e e naetin e e e : : ) || the affirmative, and the conclusion of 922 Light Street.
it Wckes T 506 ugfism m,mmuflm%www me.:mmwflmffl.fi Mwwmwwww“ d I do not finqg it necessary in this case|law is that the plaintiff is therefore|IN %Hm% %m%%dufiw o%umweuom%|w%mmmm
Fil has Been fixed at $1,058, or $103 more :w it s L that the Statd entitled to an injunction agalnst the Ewm? complainant, vs. Martin s, e
tled November 22, 1939, MWME ,Sm.EEEE.E. and in the case of| neecessarily on its face unconstitutional, | nation
W R P ree white principals, mentioned in the (because it ig the county practice rather ]
ALTER MILLS, PLAINTIFF, msmmmg_ the salary is $1800 per year,(than the mere torms of the statute
, Or $250 more than the minimum. The thich prejudices the plaintiff. There
Iimum statute for white teachers is| continuance of this unlawful discrimi-|fendant.
I wish to make it plain, how- ORDER OF PUBLICATION.
ever, that the Court is not determining| The object of this suit is to procure a
divorce a vinculo matrimonii by the com-
what particular amounts of salaries
i ; i Moss, from the defendant,
must be paid in Anne Arundel County fiwmwwcuwmommmw@u F -
( defe < i | :
BOARD OF EDUCATION o ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, A CORPORA. o asontend that the materially |ate Dractical advantages to the County| either to white or colored feachers in-| phe., il mecitess shiiat iihe <pRRGSS webs
higher salaries . i 4 :
TION, AND GEG s z aries of these three white|Sehool Bogp ] i
) RGE FOX, Ag COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT teachers of schools comparable in size|statute, mmmmg o e S
OF SCH X A : d :
SCHOOLS OF ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, DEFENDANTS, to that of which the plaintiff is a prin-|to barticipate in the so-called Equali-
/| dividually ; nor is the Board in an way | married on or about March 23rd, 1935, in
U thereby becomes entitled| to be prohibited by the injunction in|the. City of Bulfimore wnd tneSiate of
Maryland by a religious ceremony; that
this case from exercising its judgment the complainant is now, and has continu-
/| eipal is due to judg i i i 1
e [ the judgment of the|zation Fund provided by the State as as to the respective amounts to be paid | ously been a resident of the City of Balti-
poard that the three white principals T8y explained in the opinion in the
Thurgood Marsh e o
g tall, Leon A, Ransom, William H. Hastie, W. A. ©. | have superior professional attainments | ¢
Hughes, Jr., Ohariles Houston
1 and Bdward D. Lopett i { i
William ©. Walsh, o 0 ovett for complainant. \ and efficiency to that of Mills ;' but it]le
Assistant Attorney-Gen ney-General of Maryland; 4. Vernon Eney, Is to be importantly noted that these|tor
fendants, ' €ral of Maryland, and Noap, A. Hillman for de- bersonal qualities, while explaining | ilinimum of the State statute for white
| greater compensation to the particular | f
former case, That is to say, it will be| individual qu
more and the State of Maryland, for more
to individual teachers based on their] °7° &b years prior to the filing of her
: alifications, capacities and | bill of complaint; that there were no chil-
N expensive to Anne Arundel County | abilities, but is only miwm:mg from dis-|dren born unto the parties to this suit as
alse the colored teachers pay to the| erimination in salaries on account of
race or color.
issue of said marriage; that the complain-
ant has always been that of a chaste, obe-
dient and faithful wife towards the defen-
el Ehers than to fail to ecomply. there: ] ; bandoned and
! g — e ply there Counsel, g [ p een | dant; that the defendant abando
Constitutional Law—Fourteent Individuals than the minlmum county [ With and lose the benefit Ea Bt il Lusel, after conference Datween 45 nina the complainant on or about De-
h Amendment of Con titution— 5 1 s enelit of the Equili-| themgelves can submit th B t i j
of the Laws—Bill fop Injunction Against Di _” ution—Equal Protection Scale for the particular Dosition, do not | zation Fuud. The evidence shows that, | form of j ?w me _fi Ve S IPFOREIALE) comties Pk wamm. 3:5% ; s%w %:mmm owww.m
Rehosl Teachers Bocany s iscrimination As to Salary of account for the differen between | tol brine . 2 s | i udagment. or excuse therefore, and whils : -
, il € of Race or Color—Injuncti 1 ¢ ce Dbet -0 bring the colored teachers pay up to ties hereto were residents of the City of
Em?zdfl District Jud ction Granted. $1,058 oniy received by Mills and the |the statutory minimum for the white| (1) As plaintiff has not pra ed for an | Baltimore and the State of Maryland, and
e pray ek h her
= injunction a three-judge | he declared his intention to live with he
This case ig a natural se
W S one mmww fmmflwfi to Euib.:gommm of comparison it will be suffi-| white principal of a
) F. 8. 792 raifd o o Is Court, | cient to take the case of whi Or, i A
i (92, “In that case the same; et hite prineipa) e
swwmm,flswo is a colored School teache .
’eéd by the Boarq . cati
L o e Qo:sflw . oMfi wwm:mmwz more experience. In 1904 the first Iini-| not less than $1,550 ag comp
N\EE.”«SHH d, sued the Mar Bl ew_flm:s‘ m,pfl@ act for white teachers|his actual salary of $1,058, mindful of the difficul
,wmfi«,xos to secure an equalizati onsty galoaons 8 all B ibed ‘a| only indivige o ol o oy | ey
ALles paid to white and coloreq
Al ] i 2d teach-| mini i
' 1 the puplic schools of ) B s o e o 1 Won | o tnopmal .
: g St : for 3 0 chers in Anne Ar un- | by coung
motion of the defendantg aryland. | per annum; in 1908 and 1910 this was| ty including those smmoumsmzw% mwommwmw veu WWMMH.Q
) after ex-|inon . .
ded argument, the compl ;T ex-lincreased (for a teacher in white | high schools. By tne Anne Arundel [$100 of g
mparable school. | réeeiving apout $100,000 from the]|Co.,
¢ “.om;m& flmmosfim respectively who have White principal he woulq necessarily | $45,000 w
4 Urst grade rating and nine years or|receive according ,
Opinion, important rating and more than eight years’ ex-|cipals of white high schools is some-|sented b
ly EQ:&:@ the
Dresent suit the plaintife has s SeL150; and in 1939, (on a slightly | ing from $300 to $400; and there is ale counties of the State; and indeed the
)\
- filed third-party
the Oo::q Commissio salaries have been fixed by statute n teach in co: h by the Sta imi pay e
$810Ners of Ann et € Statute not achers in coloreq sc 00ls by t te | limit the [ ity h ith: v
1de] County as third pay nnelon g yearly but monthly basis, and for nimum statute, 1t j n m, ; %m hite or ¢ o,H. i mmm.o priy T wmmmfi T
v party defen. minimum t is not necessary| wh Or colored to the minima of the
g to the County scale|additiona] on the general County tax| (2)
x rate of about $2.30 per | Bopp vs.
ol ) ANt was| alom ot ¢ : ssessed valuation of property. | Sehool Cit
Nissed for various reasons stateq iy ¢:ementary schools having a first class | Scale the salaries of teachers and prin-| I 1S also true that the @3%@5@ H:.w. b SR 0,
7 ¥ s orm of minim
perien % Fo , A . y this case is not peculiar alone | See “Minimum s
he Count B ant w@um nmmmomw .mwmwou,ww_m M@Mm«fim%.mgp Hw MMMMWE,ME% than that .,mon the white|t0 Anne Arundel County, but exists to| Nat. Ed. Assoc., Wash., D. C., Jan., 1937. to the absent defendant, Martin Moss, of
¥ Board of Edycats ; 0 $750; in 1922 ary schools, the difference rang-|2 More or less extent in many other fimfiwo flumefiwmm%mfi%m w%w:mmwgmmmw:fimmm SOpIRIML, S0 TN LU ST B R0
Sued{ differen s s ‘ s i R principals that is $250 . than th ini-
h LAsis as to professional quali-| 2 differential in faycy figh school) rOBlem is not limited to the State of |mum comnty cany tr maore o “ustified by | by solieitor, on'or before the 22nd day of
len i Superin- ficati 4 ; s
t alone. Under the bracti Jus and experience) to $1,250, and, | teachers in the scale for the colored | Maryland, but exists in many Southern | (e, fact that their particular schools are
minimum of $1,550 which by the Coun-|teachers i interlocutory
iy i t / S fi.:_ cost the County only o okt
Y scale would have to be paid to any|$45,000, while at the present time it is w%:,mwH 38
if Mills were al|B ualizati w o i Water Co., 302 U. S. 410, g
1B.0002ton Fund. To raise this extra The jurisdiction of the Court in this case | final and deliberate act of the defendant,
ill mean seven or eight cents is based on 28 U. 8. C., s. 41 (1) and (14). and the separation of the parties hereto is
See also
ared with |rate for sen T -|ing from 47 cen
¢ 00l pu Uommm. mH mB Hwon un 1evy for school
on of|¢ : is th M@%CW UMWT e cmcmmnnmm mwm e o OO B - Bronx, New York City, N. Y
bk 3 C € Dplai i us create or € | cussed in the former case, and hereinafter p faan g
: S Drior to 1918) prescribed a | only Individually but on behalf of other County, as has been so forcibly urged |alo mentioned, : e Circui £
The County h t (3) A non discriminating minimum sal- | ber, 1939, ordered by the o:.mi.n szmm%.
Yy has a presen ary for teachers was held constitutional in | Baltimore City, that the comp wfimwm "order
Clark, 165 Iowa 697; see also |lyn Moss, by causing a acgm of this Wu o
Yy of Lvansville vs. Hickman, 47 | to be inserted in some daily newspaper,
um salary laws for teachers.
busses arriving and leaving at
mes,
schools to have approximately 1% . R. WHITEFORD
hours additional attendance per day ,mw n7,14,21,28 e Clerk.
er and above the time required for i
It appears, however, that what is
2 t said
as Dot authorized by U.S.C., Title | no longer as her husband, and tha
0 Stratton vs St. bomzm. S, W. 5% separation has continued :Eu.mm:cwwmm__%
282 U. 8. 10; McCart vs. Indianapolis | for more than three years prior to e
filing of this bill of complaint, and is the
tation
Act of 1939, Ch. 514, i s- | beyond m:.nm.umouwzm hope or expec
L e & St e e
SeS A sident o e s .
S Bneaondition, to WWM H.HWmn heard of whilst residing in the
It is thereupon this 6th day of Novem-
¢ y lished in the City of Baltimore, once
olihty M mzflmwwm for four successive weeks before
Salary Laws for Teachers,” | the 7th day of December 1939, give notice
the object and substance of the bill of
pear in this honorable Court, in person or
1939, to show cause if any he
g the relief prayed for
~C€ Te- if the teacher helq i sl i i mayamhaveieyny
> an academic degree, Schools, the difference in f States.e what are called consolidated schools and 2y J
S federal = 3 e e 2 ce In favor of the S ¢ shindfinies A G $ should not be granted.
of civil procedure the Aetoriaan to $1,450. By comparison the minimum | high school teacher being about $300.| ‘Nor has Anne Arundel County been Mwmmvamam%%v awsportation of pupils to the
ts{ for colored clemeniury t i A hin) i i i
tomplaints | ilap wari 4ty teachers of sim-| Ihere is also a salary differential be-| Udmindful of or indiffer i ¢ e crent i
ISt the Sigte Board of Easwn.mfioflw ilar rating has been much less. Their | tWeen elementary ang high school | l¢m. Ag previously :Mfimwfi Hnno wmwa% H.M.w“ o
W. CONWELL SMITH.
requires the principals of | True Copy—Test:
w HHHom y o % 3 o . . . s o . 3 i Kl ieis ’
> and the latter have moved to t of the time heretofore, for seyen |to state further details of tne high|State Statutes. In January, 1988, the |feduired in this respect is additional tima . N L
'S these third party co months of the year. In 1918 the mini- | School schedules in thig respect, but the | £3ard passeq g2 resolution expressing|and
LU 88 $ mplaints, ’ 9Q % g :
® complaint in this case calls 1050 ¢ as 8280 per year, increased in | ¢aSe of Frank E. Butler, a colored prin-| Simpathy with the proposition that the | Principal
from the teachers of the school to receive
1001-2 Court Square Building.
discharge pupils rather than from the | 1N THE CIRCUIT COURT OF BALTI-
alone. The teachers receive no
MORE CITY — (B—511—1939) — Marion
| at- . : o ; :
M to the Maryland statute whicp 1920 to $445 per year; in 1929 to $595; | ¢ibal of the Bates Higp School at An-|Salaries of white and colored teachers | fiational compensation for their extra Winifred A. Kendall vs. William Kendall.
d 5 sl and i - i s : oy g i ich i +
,Nw.w%flmvwswagfi mom:m Or salaries ,S% Mfifl.wfiww AMW Mmmmosyom muonmmmvm in Wwbw_m_nma.am% be memz for illustration.|Should be equalized by State law, and wfiu wufim%nmmm&w%w c%mmwwmfifi%%% g ORPER OF. EYPLICACION,
e achers, graduated to pypn. € school year) to "eceived an A.B. degree from Mor-| €XDressing regret that ne j i (5) See “Special Problems of Negro Tdu. The object of this bill is to procure a
pro o g g t no immediate Doxey A. dfl?mum%? mn%nm decree of divorce a vinculo matrimonii by
hal qualifications ang Years of o, $765 per year. At the present. time, | 820 College in 1920 and has been con-| 2¢tion could pe taken by the Board to-| S3ton.” by
lower minimum, for teachepg in
cal application only white
© employeq in White schoo]
teach-
ir vt . % 3 : P
i “_?%Sfiz qualifications and experience, | 10W receives an annual salary of $1,600.| P2¥ for the colored teachers. For the|cation by
e, | ; Ewmfiomow t 5 5 d s . Study No. 12
and a separate statute provid- e, the respective minima are tinuously employeq ag a teacher in or| Wird that result in view of the county’s | Committee of
$1,250 for white teachers and $765 for [ Principal of a, colored schoo) in Anne finances, but indicating an intention to | Government
colored teachers, i , Ar i i
S, with comparable pro- undel County fop Dineteen years, He|S00N make some crease in the rate of Ewmw mwmomvw&& Problems of Negro Wdu- | 1935, by a religious ceremony, the residence
S E 2 . Doxey A. Wilkerson, Staff Stud £ the plaintiff in Maryland for more than
The plaintiff contends that the stat- | A White principal of a comparable white | Scholastic year 193940 it has increased | No- 12, prepared for Advisory Committes | two vears prior 'to the ‘fling of the bill;
; Of ; g all,
sobrepared for the Advisory | the plaintiff, Marion Winifred A. Kendall,
HEducation, published by gw from the defendant, William Kendall.
Humwufiwmrmw»oaoo“ Washington,
The bill recites the marriage of the par-
ties in Elkton, Maryland, on January 1,
] $ and | aqh e B i : : i inti les
teachers in colored schoolg, - utes are unconstitutionally discrimina-| high school Wwould receive a minimum | it$ budget for colored teachers’ salaries | Wasprcaion, Government Printing Office, that no children were born to the parties
2 , a
he latter are paid less ip P:MM
L oty thah o
n ;m.gofiwn of ,EHEM wwn%m Mwm%mwwwm it is pointed out in defence of the stat-
UDtfF contends that this consti. pies that they constitute minimum, not
' unconstitutional diseriming.
tory on e ; o 1 Washington, 1939; also Pro ress and Prob-
Y their face and should be held | °f $2.600. from $66,000 to $74,000, which is a|lems for Equal Pay for m%:: Work, wmc.. ._.:mng:.mmzpm,mmmmuamflmguaoumgnun
generally invalid. On the other hang \%H also find from the evidence that in|Mmuch larger proportionate increase for|lished by the National Ednostion Associa-
as a result of the marriage; that without
deserted the plaintiff five days after the
ne Arunde : : tion. 1201 16th St., N. W., Washington, D. i on January 6, 1935, and
: del County there are 243]colored teachers than for white teach- | C., June, 1939, p. 945 and Minimiurg Salary WMWEMN%%. memflhwm wo live SSM zumwrfiuzn
hite teachers and 91 " i
. colored teachers;| €S, the incregse for the latter being|Laws for Teacher L , i i | t
§ ‘ . . w . L o) s, published by the same h te; that there is no reasonal
awvmum, salaries, and that, while the j|Put 70 one coloreq teacher receives so|from $210,000 to $218,000. In January,|Association January, 1937. MMH%M Mfimwowwua:mzofi wryland whose last
11¢h is prohibiteq by the equal | minimum for white teachers is higher juch salary ag any white teacher of|1939, it «ofls:fimzq increased by ten|™ — | ;1 non-resident of Maryland whose last
LEGAL NOTICES. e LI GF N o S g L R R S S
on clause of Secti jthan the minimum f ; imilar 1i :
ction 1 of "ty m for teachers in col- ar qualifications and experience, |Per cent. the 'Salaries of calavad et
;%H%Emfi to the Federa] Oodmmfl ored schools, the statutes affecting e |F The crmoist CHUONS and exj DCES 9
S iR L8 R o - e S
