Front Cover
 Title Page
 Have faith in democracy, by P.B....
 The courts and equality of property...
 Contrasts in enrollments in industrial...
 Back Matter

Group Title: April 1938
Title: Quarterly journal ; Vol. 8, no. 3, July 1939
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/AM00000191/00003
 Material Information
Title: Quarterly journal ; Vol. 8, no. 3, July 1939
Series Title: Quarterly journal - Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, Tallahassee
Physical Description: Serial
Creator: Florida Agricultural and Mechanical College
Publisher: Florida Agricultural and Mechanical College
Publication Date: July 1939
Subject: African American universities and colleges—Periodicals   ( lcsh )
Florida. Agricultural and Mechanical University, Tallahassee – Periodicals
Temporal Coverage: Common Era ( 1200 - 3000 )
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: AM00000191
Volume ID: VID00003
Source Institution: Florida A&M University (FAMU)
Holding Location: Florida A&M University (FAMU)
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: notis - AAB7863

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Page i
        Page ii
        Page iii
        Page iv
    Title Page
        Page v
        Page vi
    Have faith in democracy, by P.B. Young
        Page vii
        Page viii
        Page ix
        Page x
        Page xi
        Page xii
    The courts and equality of property rights, by Henry J. McGuinn
        Page xiii
        Page xiv
        Page xv
        Page xvi
        Page xvii
        Page xviii
        Page xix
        Page xx
        Page xxi
        Page xxii
        Page xxiii
        Page xxiv
    Contrasts in enrollments in industrial and in liberal arts programs in land-grant colleges 1938-39, by Joseph L. Langhorne
        Page xxv
        Page xxvi
        Page xxvii
    Back Matter
        Page xxviii
        Page xxix
        Page xxx
        Page xxxi
Full Text

I' July 1939

1c .p, ;":.- .,. ... ..':^


Te', Couirts and Equalitj of Property Rights
':- HENRY- J. M cGUINN .
611 .i .C
htras in Enroilmeits 'in In'dustrial and in Liberal A'
,.--l.i grams: inLand -rant. Colleges 1938- 3 .'.. :
i :L' 1. :- : ,. ~, .. : 1.

'.Ag.iculturaa. l ;and-Mec. hanical C"oie

""" .

isy' ben gaged; second, to.:record articles on. the question of .education'Ni
genral. and Negro education in a specific: sense.' Hence, the. nuatuire;f th
: s .to-fold-research and professional. ''

.To great extent, .thecontents of the Jounal w 4ll beofa local ctiarac
lii is'"irievitable,.as most of it cointrbutors' are engaged ,upon- wrk grpi
ut of situations in' Florida. But it is. not the desire, of. the 'Publictioin '-~JCe
emitte eto be rigidly restrictive; It solicits contributins of eit'hera researchd
-proofeosson nature.

rlted by the Florid Agricult-ural .ad mechanical College PresA Taliahk see, i.eloxr da

. .- . ..- ,. .: ,
, dE..rercd .as second-clas maftei-: at the, Post-Offic ,' Tallahasseeiq lorida,- under iiq if '.t
9igi .t 2*4,d92. .. .. .,

Vs ,; :- '- C, ,
".. ..C. "a .. '' i
,.!:. .. .
............ ..... .. .., ..... .. .. ,
't'. $:'.. .. '. ,.4

y, Ass' .. ,., .

Published by faculty members
of the Florida Agricultural and
Mechanical College, Tallahassee

Issued quarterly, in the months
of January, April, July, and

VOL. VIII JULY, 1939 No. 3


Have Faith in Democracy ____.........-- .....---.....--.------_ P. B. Young 5

The Courts and Equality of Property Rights -__ ---- Henry J. McGuinn 11

Contrasts in Enrollments in Industrial and in Liberal Arts Programs
in Land-Grant Colleges 1938-39 .___. .. Joseph L. Langhorne 23


P. B. YOUNG (LL.D., Shaw University), President and Editor, Norfolk Journal and

HENRY J. McGUINN (A.B., Virginia Union University; A.M., Columbia University),
Department of Sociology, Virginia Union University.

JOSEPH L. LANGHORNE (A.B., A.M., University of Michigan), Department of
English, Florida A. & M. College.

e u (uarterly Journal



HAVING had placed a brief period
of your time in my hands today
I am constrained to use it in calling
attention to some of the spiritual
values which shall be your shield and
anchor on your journey through life.
From that perspective I have chosen
to speak to you on the subject, Have
Faith in Democracy.
There are many interpretations of
Democracy today. Some responsible
leaders in our national life limit its
meaning to simple constitutional
government-with certain checks and
balances maintained by its three
branches: executive, legislative and
judicial,- a form of constitutional
government concerned solely with
political functions.
Others hold that the Founding
Fathers had in mind not only politi-
cal democracy, but economic and
social democracy. These two inter-
pretations, these separate schools of
thought give rise to the evils and
maladjustments which afflict our
The former school of thought would
confine government and public opin-
ion to the making and administration
of such laws as afford us an organized
society, while reserving to the indi-
vidual, the corporation, the monopoly
and the political subdivision great
freedom of action and wide discretion
in the exploitation of the many for
the benefit of the few.
.The latter school of thought holds
*Commencement address delivered at the
Florida A. & M. College May 29, 1939.

that our Founding Fathers intended
to establish here a nation in which all
men would be equal before the law. A
nation in which all men had equal
needs for sustaining life, and would
have equal opportunity to meet these
needs. This interpretation inspired the
idealistic language of our Declaration
of Independence. It was the inspira-
tion of our Bill of Rights which guar-
anteed us our four great freedoms:
press, speech, religion and assembly.
It was the inspiration of the spiritual
ideals which are struggling for full
expression in America today, and
which are struggling to save Democ-
racy as a way of government and
Christianity as a way of life.
This is the interpretation of Democ-
racy in which I ask you to have faith
as you leave your Alma Mater today.
It is not my intention to raise before
you the spectre of goblins. But I do
want to point out that these are extra-
ordinary times. The industrial transi-
tion of the past three decades has been
accomplished with much disturbance
to world economy. World trade has
been upset. The nations are engaged
in economic warfare. Wars and threats
of wars and international political
controversies, complicated here and
there by racial and religious conflicts,
are reasons for general anxiety. In
recent weeks we have seen revealed
the existence of alarming new class
hatreds in America, such as "The
Associated Farmers," "The Vindica-
tors," and the like, whose un-Christian


and undemocratic purpose is the op-
pression of minority groups.
The international convulsions have
caused adverse reactions upon our
national life. Internal dissensions be-
tween capital and labor have added
their contribution to the sum total
of our maladjustments. Business, agri-
culture, mining and manufacturing
have felt the impact of these disturb-
ances, and the great problem of un-
employment is still with us.
But the ideals of real Democracy
are at work and on every front there
is the urge to stimulate thinking and
action in the interest of a well-
planned and .rational organization of
world life.
There is a growing consciousness in
America that none of us shall be
secure until all of us are secure; that
the people's livelihood is inseparably
tied to a new sense of national soli-
darity, and toward that end there is
in progress the shaping of a new na-
tional, economic and social policy, a
reorganization of the American way
of life.
This movement is a welling up of
public sentiment in a people whose
ideals of Democracy are traditional
and whose love of freedom is imperish-
able. We may have to contend with
subversive forces in our society, but
the encouraging thing is that a major-
ity of the people have a healthy respect
for human rights.
This is an expression of a whole-
some understanding and appreciation
of the teachings of the New Testa-
ment, saved as a great heritage to us
by the Founding Fathers when they
incorporated in our organic law the
inexorable right of freedom of con-
science, freedom of religion.
The college graduate of 1939 needs
more than any other graduate in our
recent history to reaffirm his faith in

these principles. The most significant
thing in American life today is that
above the tumult of national discords,
the apparent breach between govern-
ment and business, the strife between
labor and capital, the boring at the
foundations of our free institutions
by termites bred in foreign "isms,"
above the noisy paroxysms of a dying
Old Order, we can sense the rise of a
New Order whose central aim is equal-
ity of opportunity.
The vast changes that have left
their impact upon us during the past
few years may have caused some of
us to lose faith in the efficacy of
Democracy. It is possible that some of
us have come to distrust or to feel
skeptical of the Democratic process.
The temptation is overwhelming in
this highly competitive machine age.
However it is possible that we are
confusing the abstract' concept of
Democracy (as a social and political
philosophy) with the perverted func-
tioning of governmental machinery,
and of economic and social action in
the name of Democracy in this and
other countries. Those of us who have
been close observers of activity in the
vast experimental laboratory we call
our civilization, are likely to feel that
Democracy has failed and are tempted
to search for alternate philosophies of
But we should not be led astray
by current preachments against either
Christianity or democracy. We should
not let the disciples of Godless isms
undermine our faith in God or our
I think the educated youths of
today can be depended upon to keep
their feet in the right road. You have
a racial heritage of constancy to the
religion of Jesus Christ. It has been
that devotion to Christian ideals that
has anchored us in many a storm; that


has given us the fortitude that has
carried us through periods of oppres-
sion; that has afforded us the faith
and perseverance that have given us
the most marvelous resistance to suf-
fering of any people in the history of
American civilization.
In our talk today we are thinking
primarily of spiritual values because
there is no economic specific that one
can recommend to college graduates
in 1939. One might suggest some par-
ticular expedient and tomorrow's
newspapers would announce new de-
velopments that would nullify every
aspect of one's recommendation. This
is the scientific age. New inventions
are daily changing the pattern of our
social order. Science is so far ahead
that the suggestion has been made that
science might well take a vacation
for ten years so that the people can
catch up with science.
For over a hundred years there have
been periods of alarm concerning the
growth of invention, the supplanting
of man by machines. But under the
American way we have achieved the
highest standards of living, and ways
are being found to maintain these
standards of living with even further
utilization of machines. Your educa-
tion has prepared you to adjust your
talents, your hopes and your aspira-
tions to a rapidly changing political,
economic and social environment.
You leave here prepared to adjust
your conception of practical things
to fit into the evolutionary pattern
of community life, but also prepared
to hang on to the few abstracts which
make for facility in change, and which
-prevent disillusionment. For a sum-
mary of these let us examine further
the tenets of our Democracy, and ob-
serve their close relation to the tenets
of Christianity.
Democracy is essentially Christian

in concept. Dr. Fosdick has well said
that Jesus was the first great believer
in Democracy. He leaped the barriers
set up by caste and convention. He
talked about the gospel for the poor,
comfort for the broken-hearted, deliv-
erance for the captive, sight for the
blind, liberty for the bruised; about
famines for Israel and recovery for
It was His love of people, his con-
cern for all men which displeased the
Rulers of His time. It was the parable
of the lost coin, of the lost sheep, of
the Prodigal Son, which affronted
them. It was His advocacy of the
democratic process which caused the
mob to crucify the Master. Democ-
racy and Christianity are inseparable.
In our Western world there is great
concern about Christianity and De-
mocracy. One day our beloved Presi-
dent issues a warning that if the
totalitarian States are successful in
their designs our free institutions will
perish. There will be no free press,
free speech, free assembly, and free-
dom to worship God according to the
dictates of our own conscience. It
will be the end of free government.
Another day we hear the leading
statesmen of Great Britain calling
upon that Empire, and upon the world
to join in a movement for "Moral
The doctrine of moral rearmament
is not new. It has been advocated
for years by the Oxford Group. It
has been an ideal of small groups.
Now it has seized a whole empire,
with the members of Parliament, the
leaders of business and labor, the heads
of the army and navy, jointly urging
international sanction as a solvent of
the social injustice that retards peace
and security.
Honesty, faith and love, applied to
human relations are needed to lay the


foundation on which a new world
may be built.
The call for moral rearmament is
an appeal to the individual to correct
in his own heart, his own home, his
own surroundings, the defects of hu-
man character. The idea is to change
the hearts of individuals, that indi-
viduals, who collectively form the
nations, will change the hearts of
nations. Honesty, faith and love, as
expressed in true democracy and
Christianity, reside only in an atmos-
phere of freedom.
When an American goes to Europe
and observes what is going on there
he returns home distraught over the
atheism and Communism in Russia,
the pagan state of Germany, and the
fascist commonwealth of Italy. There
is no freedom of the individual in
those countries, which are opposed to
democracy in all of its ways.
They are dealing there with the
same technological problems that we
have, and they boast that they have
adjusted these problems, that they
have no unemployment. But how have
they achieved this?
They have settled their problems
by herding their people in detention
camps, by the firing squad, by bloody
purges, and by wars of aggression.
That is not the Democratic way. De-
mocracy believes that liberty and
progress go hand in hand, while des-
potism leads always to stagnation and
Democracy may seem slow, but with
all its plodding and muddling, prog-
ress has been made during the past
one hundred years. There have been
times when the heavy hand of the
political or industrial tyrant was laid
upon the weak and defenseless; times
when oppression ruled and human
rights were abridged, but the right
of men to protest before a government

of laws has never been denied. The
right of free speech, free assembly,
and the right of petition have always
received public support and the courts
of last resort have always upheld the
Constitution. The democratic process
may have moved always with leaden
feet, but up through the years it has
always moved toward larger considera-
tion for human rights, always toward
equality of opportunity.
Eighty years after our Declaration
of Independence was adopted Lincoln
found it necessary to remind America
that "this Nation was dedicated to
the proposition that all men are cre-
ated free and equal." Had not our
Democracy been a living, growing,
vital thing, Lincoln would not have
been able to proclaim a new creed
for this nation at Gettysburg. We
would not have in our Constitution
the 13th, 14th and 15th Amend-
ments. We would not have a Supreme
Court, that sustains these amendments
when subversive forces would nullify
them. We would not have extended
equal rights to women.
Slow, plodding Democracy has en-
acted laws that fifty years ago could
not be sustained by public opinion.
There are the Child Labor Acts which
have reached into the sweatshops and
the factories and removed pre-adoles-
cent children from virtual slavery and
put them back into the homes and
schools, where they belonged. There
are the statutes which protect labor
from exploitation and give it the legal
right of collective bargaining.
It required nearly a century for
Jefferson's dream of a system of pub-
lic education to come true, and while
this system is still blighted with in-
equalities, this splendid college bears
testimony to the growth of Jefferson's
Thomas Paine wrote a complete


plan for Social Security 150 years ago,
but Democracy was not ready for it.
We now have an approximation of
Paine's ideal. It is incomplete, inade-
quate, imperfect, but it is a step in
the direction of Social Security.
While we have not achieved perfec-
tion, and our progress in that direction
is slow, revolutionary changes have
occurred in our political, economic and
social structure. These changes have
been accomplished under the Demo-
cratic process without depriving a
single American of individual liberty;
without the march of a single regi-
ment, or the chatter of a single ma-
chine gun.
I have referred to the rise of a
New Order, whose central aim is
equality of opportunity. What has
happened? First, the recognition that
the people of the commonwealth, on
all social levels, were victims of a
maladjustment economy; that it was
in the province of a Democracy to
assist its members in recovering their
equilibrium, and it tackled the job
with the vast resources of this nation.
Expert inquiry has proceeded in order
to determine the areas of further min-
istration: Unemployment, health, hous-
ing, farms, disadvantaged youth, adults
handicapped by illiteracy. That is De-
mocracy at work.
Durant Drake points out in his
"Problems of Conduct," what he calls
"the philosophy of happiness in a nut-
shell." This is his prescription: "Put
your heart into following the great
ideal; demand nothing else of life than
the opportunity to follow this ideal;
enjoy freely and without fear every-
thing good and beautiful that comes
your way."
I have held up to your view the
ideal of Democracy, because it encom-
passes the ideals of brotherhood, of
Christianity, of equality of opportu-

nity-not immediately attainable, per-
haps by all but the heritage ulti-
mately of all, who in the pursuit of
it, follow the example of the Master,
who led His fellowmen by loving
them. In his essay, "The Greatest
Thing in the World," Henry Drum-
mond spoke of "The Spectrum of
Love," as having nine ingredients:
Patience, kindness, generosity, humil-
ity, courtesy, unselfishness, good tem-
per, gentleness, sincerity. These ingre-
dients of love, says Drummond, make
up the supreme gift, "The stature of
the perfect man."
I have held up to your view the
ideal of Democracy, because it stands
for freedom. The right of every indi-
vidual to burgeon out of himself the
best that is within him. The right to
achieve, to have, and to hold those
things which ennoble the spirit; those
things which serve humanity.
The Totalitarian States sometimes
point a finger of derision at America
because of some of the proscriptions
which American minorities suffer. But
even though it is true that minority
groups in America labor under the
disadvantages of an imperfect democ-
racy, that freedom is infinitely better
than anything offered in the Totali-
tarian States.
In one of these states the culture of
an old and distinguished race has been
completely destroyed as a component
of that nation's culture. Their syna-
gogues have been demolished, their
libraries destroyed, and their contents
burned; their scholars have been ban-
ished and their wealth confiscated.
While all of this was going on no
member or group of members of that
old and distinguished race was per-
mitted to protest through the instru-
ments of a free press, free speech, or
free assembly.
A short while ago a distinguished


American artist was engaged to give
a recital at our nation's capital. Be-
cause of her race she was denied first,
the use of a private auditorium, bear-
ing the name of our Constitution and
owned by a society whose members
boast of their Revolutionary ancestry;
secondly, she was denied the use of a
public school auditorium controlled
by a minor sub-division of the govern-
ment. This was so conspicuously un-
democratic that it instantly aroused
the deep concern of many persons high
in the government and thousands of
American citizens, who raised their
voices in protest by the use of their
democratic right of free press, free
speech and free assembly.
It followed that this distinguished
artist was invited to sing on the steps
of the great shrine erected there to the
memory of Lincoln, the immortal
emancipator. At her back, the tower-
ing figure of Lincoln, in front of her
the granite shaft erected to the mem-
ory of Washington, reaching five
hundred feet toward the skies. A dis-

tinguished American, a typical Ameri-
can, presented her to 75,000 free peo-
ple who assembled to hear her, and
to millions who heard her over the
radio, as a woman whom "genius had
touched with the tip of her wing."
And as she stood there and sang, "My
Country, 'Tis of Thee, Sweet Land
of Liberty," a new sense of trium-
phant democracy thrilled America,
and it seemed that the voice of Lincoln
was heard to say again, "This country
cannot exist half slave and half free."
The opportunity is yours to make
your contribution to free government
and equality of opportunity. If you
would justify the faith in you, have
faith in democracy, and keep liberty,
equality and justice inviolate in our
Through the dark and stormy night
Faith beholds a feeble light
Up the blackness breaking;
Knowing God's own time is best,
In a patient hope I rest
For the full day breaking.




T HE attempt to disfranchise the
Negro1 politically had not received
its final defeat at the hands of the
Maryland electorate before the issue
of residential segregation involved the
colored citizens of Baltimore in a series
of costly suits. The cases, rising out
of this issue, are known as the Segre-
gation Cases and cover most of the
decade between 1910-1920. These
cases are of more than passing inter-
est to the student of the relationship
of Sociology and law in this country.
Throughout the trial of the Segrega-
tion Cases the defense appealed to pre-
vailing racial attitudes and to custom
as forces supporting the validity of the
ordinances. The prevention of con-
flict between the two racial groups
was said to constitute a sufficient rea-
son for passing the ordinances.In terms
of the prevailing racial doctrines an
even stronger argument was presented
to the courts. Segregation would di-
minish those types of racial contact
which lead to social equality, and
racial amalgamation. The ordinances
were, therefore, justifiable exercises of
police power since they prevented the
destruction of the taboo against racial
intermarriage. Racial reasons, there-
fore, constituted the justification for
the enactment of laws which limited

1 The Supreme Court of the United States
(Oct. Term, 1916), No. 33, Charles H.
Buchanan v. William Warley, Brief Amicus
Curiae, W. Ashbie Hawkins, attorney for the
Baltimore Branch of the N. A. A. C. P.

a right guaranteed to the people by
the American Constitution.
Baltimore was among the first
American cities to resort to the enact-
ment of a law as a means of imposing
segregation in the use of churches,
residences and schools upon its Negro
citizens. The ordinances which other
cities subsequently passed are said to
have followed the Baltimore ordinance
in form and in substance.
The first Baltimore Ordinance, the
West Law of 1910, was declared un-
constitutional by Judges Harlan and
Duffy in January 1911. In the case on
which the above-named judges passed,
a Negro, who had recently moved into
a white neighborhood, wounded one
of a group of white boys who was
throwing stones into his home, occa-
sioned the important decision. The
ground upon which the Negro was
finally released was the well known
principle of the Common Law that a
man's home is his castle and the king
of England may not enter without his
permission.2 The City Council then
passed Segregation Ordinance No. 54,
but as some irregularity attended its
passage, a third Ordinance No. 692,
known also as the Curtis Ordinance,
was enacted and became the officially
recognized law of racial segregation
in Baltimore, May 15, 1911.
2Ibid., p. 1, and interviews with J. Ashbie
Hawkins and W. T. McGuinn, attorneys for
the defense.


The ostensible purpose of Ordinance
No. 692 was to preserve the peace and
to prevent racial conflict between the
white and Negro people, subsequent
to its passage, from moving into or
occupying houses, buildings or struc-
tures in any block which was used
exclusively as a place of abode by col-
ored people. Within the meaning of
the law such a block was a colored
block. Section 2 in identical language
prohibited any colored person from
doing what Section 1 prohibited any
white person from doing. The law did
not attempt to legislate as to those
mixed blocks which were occupied at
the time oi its passage by Negro and
white citizens. It made an exception
in the case of domestic servants. They
were excluded from the operation of
the law when living in the homes of
their employers."
The most widely publicized case
which arose out of the violation of
Ordinance No. 692 was that of Gurry
v. State of Maryland (121 Md. 543).
Gurry, a Negro, owned a house located
in a white block, but had not lived
in it prior to the passage of the Cur-
tis Ordinance. After Ordinance No.
692 became law he moved into his
home, for which act he was arrested
and convicted in the courts of Balti-
more City. Negroes thought this
action of great racial significance, and
so the Baltimore Branch of the Na-
tional Association for the Advance-
ment of Colored People held meetings
about it in Negro churches. Local
attorneys and race leaders addressed
the audiences and funds were raised
with which to carry the case on ap-
peal to the highest state court at An-
napolis. W. Ashbie Hawkins and Mc-
8Cf. Ordinance No. 692 of Mayor and
Council of Baltimore City (1911), also State
of Maryland v. Gurry (121 Md. 534 et

Mecken, Negro attorneys, and C.
Brooks Aimes, a white attorney, pre-
sented Gurry's appeal.
In deciding the case the Court of
Appeals did not find that Ordinance
No. 692 was an interdiction based
upon race and color and that it was
hence a violation of the Fourteenth
Amendment to the Constitution of the
United States, as counsel for Gurry
contended, since "what was denied
one class was also denied another."4
The Court agreed with the Attorney
General of Maryland and the City
Solicitor that the passage of such an
ordinance was not an exercise of legis-
lative authority in excess of the power
granted the City of Baltimore by the
State Legislature. This was held to be
true since, if the State Legislature had
the power to pass such a law, as the
court believed it had, then such action
fell also within the limits of the power
of the City Council. The opinion of
the Court of Appeals in Rossbery v.
State (111 Md. 394) held that the
city has power under the charter to
pass statutes under the police power
equal to legislative enactments. Ad-
mitted race friction was also held to
be a sufficient justification for the
exercise of police power.
The court, however, did agree with
Gurry's attorneys in declaring the or-
dinance an unwarranted invasion of
vested property rights because it whol-
ly ignored the vested rights which
existed at the time of the passage of
the ordinance.5 Ordinance No. 692
was, therefore, held to be unconstitu-
tional. In concluding its opinion the
court said:
"But we have never known of a case which
approached the exercise of such power as is
4State of Maryland v. Gurry (121 Md.
5 Ibid., p. 551.


contended for under this ordinance to pro-
hibit one who was owner when the ordinance
was passed from moving into it, simply be-
cause he is of a different color from the
other person although he might keep his
premises in better condition and in every way
more attractive than others... we deem the
provisions as they were passed too unreason-
able to permit us to assume that the legisla-
ture intended to confer upon the Municipal-
ity the power thus to affect vested rights."6

Had the court looked through the
form to the substance of this law it
would have discovered that its effect
was to discriminate against the Ne-
gro. On the surface, the law seemed
to apply equally to both races. It was
discriminatory in the limitations which
it placed upon the use of property
which white men owned in Negro
neighborhoods. In its practical results
segregation bore more heavily upon
the Negro group. The neighborhoods
in which Negroes lived were already
overcrowded, and in many instances
poorly paved and provided with
meager recreational facilities for their
children. The purchase prices and
rentals of property were in excess of
the purchase prices and rentals in the
less congested white sections. In spite
of the Negro's capacity to pay, he was
forced to live in overcrowded com-
munities with all of the physical and
moral hazards which living under such
conditions entailed. The very concen-
tration of the ownership of property
in the hands of the white race meant
that the law in its operation would
provide greater residential mobility for
white citizens than for black, and

SIbid., The Supreme Court of Georgia
found the Atlanta Ordinances of June 6,
1913 based upon the Baltimore Ordinance
No. 692 was unconstitutional because it de-
nied the inherent right of a person to acquire,
enjoy and dispose of property, and for this
reason violative of the due process clause of
the Federal and State Constitutions. See Carey
v. Atlanta (84 S. E. 456).

hence was in the nature of a practical
discrimination against Negroes. A
forthright declaration to this effect
would have saved the city and its
colored citizens alike the tedium and
expense of further litigation.
The Mayor and Council of Balti-
more seemed to believe that their pur-
poses could be accomplished by the
passage of other laws. They, therefore,
enacted Ordinance No. 339 and Ordi-
nance No. 355 which provided for
the segregation of the races but pre-
served the right of occupancy to those
persons who had acquired property in
white or colored blocks prior to their
Before offenders could be brought
into court for violating these Ordi-
nances, The American City, the New
York Evening Post and a special edi-
torial in the Baltimore Evening Sun
adversely criticized the government
for attempting to segregate the Negro
again. The editor of The American
City did not attempt to say whether
the Supreme Court would find these
restrictions consistent with the Fed-
eral Constitution. He did suggest that
a country which permits the sowing
of seeds of injustice to a class of hu-
man beings within its borders reaps
inevitably a harvest of strife and often
the long drawnout agony of a civil
After pointing to the fact that
forcing a Negro population of more
than eighty-five thousand to live in
close quarters would of necessity in-
crease the amount of tuberculosis, a
disease which has no aversion to the
white race, and intensify such moral
problems as promiscuity, illegitimacy
and venereal disease, the editor asked
whether the hostility and suspicion
which such legislation aroused would
increase the happiness of the white
population. The price which the coun-


try had already paid for its greed and
stupidity in dealing with the Negro
question was felt to be already
The New York Evening Post de-
nounced the Baltimore law as an at-
tempt to return to the ghetto of the
Middle Ages. Europe, it pointed out,
had long since abandoned this prac-
tice. Since segregation was contrary
to every modern ideal and practice it
was not to be tolerated in a commu-
nity which calls itself democratic. Its
successful application to Negroes in
Baltimore was also fraught with
the possibility that similar legislation
might be undertaken against Jews, or
Slavs or Italians or other groups in our
Charles J. Boneparte, a citizen of
Maryland, and Attorney-General of
the United States in the cabinet of
Theodore Roosevelt, expressed the
sentiment of some of the citizens of
Baltimore who were opposed to segre-

"These difficulties arise very largely from
the fact that the Fourteenth Amendment pre-
vents these enactments from saying plainly
what their authors mean, and obliges the
latter to profess a purpose which they do
not really entertain. What they wish is to
keep Negroes out of desirable neighborhoods;
if they could provide by law that, within
the city limits, no Negro should live on a
highway more than twenty feet wide or own
or rent a house of more than twelve feet
front, this would perfectly satisfy them, and
they would pay no more heed to the question
whether white people lived on these alleys,
as the Negro's neighbors, than has ever been
paid by our municipal government since we
had such a government in Baltimore. Unfort-
unately for their charitable and enlightened
ends, they can't now banish by law the
niggers to the slums, as they might have
done twenty years ago; and this lamentable
condition of affairs compels them to affect
7The American City, XI (1931), 295.
8 Ibid., p. 295. Quotation from New York
Evening Post.

a ridiculously sincere purpose lest this same
proximity which the white people of Balti-
more have endured without apparent injury
for more than a century should suddenly
become disastrous to the manners and morals
of these very same white people."9

The San Francisco Chronicle after
reviewing the fact that a house, in a
white neighborhood, into which a re-
spectable Negro family had moved,
was bombarded with bricks and stones
for three hours by white men and boys
cited the incident as a proof of the
kind of police force which Baltimore
keeps. It also observed that when Ne-
groes struck back in a retaliatory
bombardment of the houses of neigh-
boring white people the only remedy
which the city fathers could think of
was a segregation ordinance which
could have no legal validity, although
public opinion might cause it to be
respected. The editorial continued:

"If the street where these outrages took
place was occupied exclusively by whites, and
especially if it is a prominent residential
street, one may concede that, knowing the
feeling, the colored family was unwise to
move in there, but they were within their
legal rights, and a respectable Negro family
of the same grade, for the Negro family has
more to contend with."
After praising San Francisco be-
cause no acts of mob violence had
ever been committed against Negroes,
Chinese, Japanese or Hindoos, the edi-
tor argued that this was due to an
absence of hatred and the mob spirit
rather than to an absence of racial
"But there are no race hatreds here. The
Negro or Asiatic is safe from mob violence
because there is no mob feeling. Persons of
any race may live anywhere in this city
without fear of attack and with full assur-
ance of the same protection that is extended
to our own people. The neighbors on a fine
9 "Again Segregation," the Baltimore Eve-
ning Sun, Sept. 20, 1913.


residential street would probably unanimously
object to having a colored family move in
but the family would not be disturbed, and
what is true in this respect of San Francisco
is true of California."
After saying that East has pictured
San Francisco as a hotbed of racial
proscription in its most virulent form,
he concluded that "in this respect it
is the most decent city in the coun-
Soon after the arrest of Thomas
Jackson of Baltimore on November
14, 1914 was the first case brought
before the courts as a result of the
violation of Ordinances 339 and 355.
He was convicted by reason of having
purchased and moved into a house in
a white block. As a result of his con-
viction, his case was appealed by the
Baltimore Branch of the National
Association for the Advancement of
Colored People in what was its sec-
ond suit against segregation in Mary-
land. Before the appeal was heard the
celebrated case involving the segrega-
tion ordinance of Louisville, Kentucky
had been brought before the United
States Supreme Court. At the request
of City Solicitor S. S. Fields and W.
Ashbie Hawkins the Maryland Court
of Appeals held the case of Jackson
v. Maryland sub curia pending the
outcome of the Kentucky case. These
attorneys, as the representatives of the
city of Baltimore and Jackson respec-
tively, filed briefs amicus curiae with
the Supreme Court of the United
States in the case of Warley v. Ken-
tucky (245 U. S. 60) [1917].
After the Supreme Court had de-
10 The Crisis, Dec. 1913, p. 70. It is inter-
esting to note that Segregation was very much
in the public mind. During the Wilson ad-
ministration segregation was introduced into
the governmental departments at Washington.
The December 1913 and January 1914 issues
of The Crisis carried extended press comments
on this point.

dared the Kentucky law invalid but
before the Maryland Court of Appeals
had acted in the Jackson case, another
case arose in Baltimore which tended
to show that the Baltimore ordinances
and the ordinances of Richmond, Vir-
ginia, and Atlanta, Georgia were alike
invalid. In August 1917, Dr. William
Coleman, a colored man, purchased
a house at 2038 McCulloch Street in
what was then a white block. He did
not, however, immediately occupy this
house as a dwelling because he was
advised by the police department of
Baltimore City that to do so would
be in violation of Ordinances Nos.
339 and 355 of 1913, which Ordi-
nances had been approved by the
Mayor and City Council of Baltimore
City as the law of racial segregation
respectively on September 25, 1913
and November 8, 1913. When he was
subsequently informed by his attorney
that the Louisville ordinance had
been declared unconstitutional by the
United States Supreme Court on
March 14, 1917, he moved into his
McCulloch Street property. For this
he was arrested by Captain George C.
Henry of the Northwestern police
force and was committed, in default
of bail of three hundred dollars which
he refused to give, to the Baltimore
jail. His attorney, the late Warner T.
McGuinn, immediately applied to
Honorable John C. Rose, Judge of
the United States District Court for
the District of Maryland, for a writ
of habeas corpus in his client's behalf
on the ground that Dr. Coleman, by
virtue of the decision of the United
States Supreme Court in Warley v.
Kentucky, was detained and restrained
in his liberty contrary to rights guar-
anteed him under the constitution of
the United States. Judge Rose ordered
Dr. Coleman released and requested
the attorneys to submit briefs and ap-


pear before him to show cause why
he should not grant the writ.
The chief argument presented by
City Solicitor S. S. Fields in objection
to granting the writ was that the
Baltimore Ordinances were different
from the Louisville Ordinances and
that the Supreme Court's decision did
not apply to them. He also stressed
the point that while the invasion
of white neighborhoods by Negroes
might not lead to overt race conflict
in Baltimore this result had followed
in other localities. Segregation laws
were thus a means of preventing con-
flict between the races."1
In presenting the case for the issu-
ance of the writ Dr. Coleman's coun-
sel said, that by agreement of attor-
neys on both sides and by leave of
the court the Baltimore Ordinances
were before the Supreme Court when
it passed upon the validity of and
condemned the Louisville ordinance.
The action of Louisville, St. Louis,
Richmond, and Baltimore therefore
amounted to the pooling of issues in
one case. Since this was true the ver-
dict of the Supreme Court in Warley
v. Kentucky foreclosed the discussion
of segregation in the United States
Court for the District of Maryland.12
In closing his argument in Dr.
Coleman's behalf the defense attorney
related the whole issue of segregation
and discrimination against the Negro
to the larger crisis which confronted
American society. America had entered
the World War in April, 1917. He,
therefore, reminded the Court that as
young colored and white men are
ready to go to Europe to fight for
democracy, young colored soldiers
should not be made to think that
11 The Baltimore Sun, Dec. 5, 1917.
12 Warner T. McGuinn, "Use of Coleman
v. Henry" (Manuscript of argument), p. 6.

segregation prevails at home. "Free-
dom is the slogan of the day."'3
Judge Rose expressed regret that he
was called upon to pass judgment on
Dr. Coleman's rights while the Mary-
land Court of Appeals had the Jack-
son case under advisement. Since, how-
ever, the United States Supreme Court
had clearly expressed itself as to the
unconstitutionality of the law under
which Dr. Coleman was arrested,
Judge Rose held that a Federal Court
could not compel the petitioner to ex-
haust all of his remedies in the state
Courts before granting his petition for
a writ of habeas corpus.
He, therefore, ordered Dr. Coleman
released, holding that the Supreme
Court in its decision reserved no ques-
tion and that whatever legislation to
mitigate race conflict might be per-
missible no ghettoes could be legally
In delivering this opinion the Judge
pointed to restrictions upon Negroes,
such as those requiring attendance
upon separate schools and separate
accommodations on the railroad,
which were established in law and still
others, economic in their nature, re-
sulting in the fact that Negroes pay
higher rentals. He concluded that it
was beyond the wit of man to devise
a segregation law which would be fair
to all.
The Baltimore Sun described this
decision as ruling out segregation
and said that the decision of Judge
Rose would have wide effect not
only in Baltimore but in other cities
in which segregation ordinances had
been passed.1'
The Negro press had obviously fol-
lowed the segregation cases with in-
13 The Afro-American, Dec. 9, 1917.
14Ibid., Dec. 8, 1917.
15The Baltimore Sun, Dec. 5, 1917.


terest. The Afro-American for No-
vember 17, 1917 suggested that the
Maryland Court of Appeals would be
bound to follow the decision of the
Supreme Court in determining the
Jackson case. Its editorials were on
the whole conciliatory. Under the cap-
tion, "Let's Go Slow," it cautioned
the Negro population not to stir up
strife needlessly by rushing into white
neighborhoods for the sake of getting
back at white people. Following the
decision of Judge Rose, this same paper
became less guarded and said that there
was only one way for that jurist to
act since the Supreme Court of the
United States had decided against seg-
regation. It cited the fact that the
Coleman case arose at all as indicating
how hard "color-mad white folk were
taking this upsetting of their well-
laid plans to coop the Negroes up in
northwest Baltimore." Criticizing Dr.
Coleman's neighbor, who threatened
to move if a protest of the white prop-
erty owners proved ineffective, the
paper said: "While we do say that col-
ored people are for the most part going
to live to themselves through choice
and not rush into other sections just
to be beside the whites, we also say
that we have a right to live where we
please and if white people cannot live
by the side of self-respecting colored
folk in peace and good will, let them
go to and move."16
The inter-weaving of the racial and
economic issues is clearly shown in
Maryland's last segregation case, State
of Maryland v. Jackson. An examina-
tion of the briefs arising out of that
case, which were submitted to the Su-
preme Court in Warley v. Kentucky,
shows that racial reasons were pre-
16 The Afro-American, Baltimore, Nov. 10,
1917, "Let's Go Slow."

sented as a justification of actions
which were primarily economic.
The City Solicitor held that the
people of Baltimore were generally of
the opinion that these ordinances had
accomplished their purpose of promot-
ing the general welfare and preventing
racial conflict without driving Ne-
groes into the alleys to live. Fine
houses located on well-lighted and
well-paved streets which had former-
ly been the dwellings of people of
means were available to them as a re-
sult of the operation of the law. In
any event there was abundant vacant
land in the city on which residences
would be built in the event of a short-
age of houses for colored people.17
Jackson's counsel replied by show-
ing that no consensus of opinion had
been reached in the matter and that
the ordinances had been put through
the City Council on a strictly party
vote. The city newspapers had split
on the issue and as real estate men had
done likewise, the generalization of
the City Solicitor seemed not to have
been well founded.
The real estate situation was also
shown to be acute. All or nearly all,
of the land available for residence pur-
poses, in or around Baltimore was al-
ready in the hands of white people,
many of whom would, in the absence
of any restraint of law, not sell it to
Negroes nor improve the property so
that they might occupy it. Mr. Haw-
kins also contended that the ordi-
nances from their inception were not
in the interest of the public welfare
but "were enacted in the interest of
a particular class of white people who,
17 In the Supreme Court of the U. S.
(Oct. Term 1916), No. 33, Charles S. Buch-
anan v.. William Warley (245 U. S. 60),
"Brief Amicus Curiae," on Behalf of the
Mayor and City Council of Baltimore. S. S.
Field, City Solicitgr, pp. 2-3.


for purely aesthetic reasons or those
inspired by race prejudice, were averse
to living in close proximity to persons
of color.8s
Mr. Fields also contended that cer-
tain white property-owners who were
motivated by spite and cupidity had
induced Negroes to move into white
residence areas. The results of this
invasion of white areas led to the de-
struction of property values. He,
therefore, urged that the restrictions
of these ordinances would not work
a hardship on the majority of either
racial group but would compel the
very small minority to respect the
feelings and sentiments of the major-
ity of both races.
This argument19 was answered out
of court as well as in court. Baltimore
was experiencing a sharp decline in
property values. The sale of property
to Negroes was neither the result of

18 Charles S. Buchanan v. William Warley,
Brief Amicus Curiae, on behalf of the Balti-
more Branch of the N. A. A. C. P. W.
Ashbie Hawkins, counsel, p. 24.
19 Field's Brief, p. 3. As early as August
1913 when the City Council had the passage
of the ordinances under advisement, Mr.
Charles Boneparte wrote: "As a result of
this comparatively stunted growth, it may
be true that Negroes have become the best,
indeed the only purchasers or tenants of
houses in certain parts of the city which were
formerly in demand at a fair price by white
and colored, the reasonableness of an ordi-
nance which virtually obliges the owners of
such houses to keep them empty, while paying
full taxes on them to the same city govern-
ment prohibiting their only profitable use
will hardly seem self-evident to a court
obliged to find a municipal law reasonable
in order to uphold it as law at all." Charles
J. Boneparte, "Two Bad Kinds of Segrega-
tion," The Baltimore Evening Sun, August
16, 1913.
See also The Crisis for November 1913,
p. 336 for comment of Dr. William P. Chum,
M.D., a white property owner who assigned
the decline in property values to railroads and
bad odors from oil refineries, etc.

spite nor of cupidity but a product
of the fact that the crowded condi-
tions under which Negroes lived made
them the best potential buyers of
One of the most interesting argu-
ments of the City Solicitor was the
one which pictured Negroes and
whites as accommodating themselves
nicely to the situation. Druid Hill
Avenue and some of the better paved
streets were becoming aristocratic
sections in which Negroes took great
pride. Negroes, in other words, were
contented, and liked segregation so
well that they would not have brought
a test case before the courts if left
to themselves. He then put the blame
squarely on the shoulders of Senator
Moses Clapp, a stranger, who dis-
rupted the peace of. the community
by disregarding the prevailing mores
and introducing new social values
among Negroes. Accordingly Senator
Clapp had made a speech at a mass
meeting in one of the Negro churches,
October 14, 1914 in which he had
stirred Negroes up to "Fight for
It will be recalled that this is a
favorite refuge of exploiters. Thus,
the great northward migration of Ne-
groes during and immediately after
the World War was seldom related by
the Southern people to conditions
which Negroes found unbearable. The
labor agents of great northern indus-
trial concerns did it all with the lure
of high wages. Among the sharecrop-
pers it is not peonage, but rather the
Communist. The relationship between
fundamental repressions and social dis-
-content is seldom, therefore, accepted
by those who benefit by the sources
20 Cf. Brief of Solicitor S. S. Fields, pp. 3-4.


of discontent and who try to explain
them away.21
In reply to this point Attorney
Hawkins contended that Negroes had
appealed to the courts and used every
means at their disposal to invalidate
Ordinances Nos. 339 and 355 of 1913
and their predecessors because they
were designed to embarrass the Ne-
groes' struggle for improvement, to
increase the cost of their living and
to render it more difficult to secure
houses or desirable property for invest-
ment. They, therefore, needed neither
the services of Senator Clapp nor any-
one else to inspire them to seek redress
for their grievances.
The next point raised was purely
racial. Segregation preserved the pur-
ity of the races against those Negroes
who moved into white neighborhoods
seeking social equality. Said the Solici-
tor: "The reason which sustains laws
against intermarriage and laws making
sexual intercourse between black and
white a crime is to prevent cross-
breeding between races. This same
reason sustains provision for prevent-
ing black and white children grow-
ing up side by side with front door

21 The Forum, Springfield, Ill., remarks in
this connection: "Segregation is carried out
effectively in the South even to the ceme-
tery where mortal man is popularly supposed
to be unable to have intercourse and no fric-
tion can be caused. But they have more
trouble in the South with all the thorough
practice of segregation than is had in the
North where it is not carried to such ex-
tremes. The white people of the South say
that Negroes are satisfied and they leave by
the thousands monthly. Thus, we see that
in spite of segregation and repression, the prob-
lem continues and will continue until all
reach and put into practice a standard of
valuation based on something other than color
or previous condition." The Forum, Spring-
field, Illinois, October 19, 1919.

steps either adjoining or within a few
feet of each other."22
The answer offered in behalf of the
colored people was that their opposi-
tion to segregation did not grow out
of the desire to invade white neigh-
borhoods or to do anything else to dis-
turb the harmony of the community,
but because they knew as citizens of
Baltimore, that such measures were
harmful to every interest of the com-
munity enacting them. This answer
illustrates the fact that the Negro in
fighting his cause stated it in terms of
accepted and established community
values. The same argument was raised
when the Kentucky case was presented
to the Supreme Court. Clayton Blakey
and Moorfield Storey answered it by
saying that had Providence in fact
erected such a barrier, no human laws
would be needed to prevent miscege-
nation. They accused the authors of
the ordinances of being unwilling to
trust the Providence whom they in-
voked and to seek to establish a bar-
rier by human legislation which did
not exist in nature.23

22 Field's Brief, p. 10. The case of West
Chester R. R. Co. v. Miles (55 Pa. St. 213-
214) was quoted in support of this point.
"It is simply to say that following the order
of Divine Providence human authority ought
not to cause these widely separate races to
inter-mix. The right of each to be free from
social contact is as clear as the right of
each to be free from inter-marriage.... When,
therefore, we declare a right to maintain
separate relations as far as is reasonably prac-
ticable but in the spirit of kindness and char-
ity and with due regard to equal rights, it
is not prejudice, nor caste nor injustice of
any kind, but simply to follow the rule
established by the Creator himself and not
to compel them to mix contrary to their
23 In the Supreme Court of the U. S.
(Oct. Term 1911) Chas. H. Buchanan v.
William Warley, Brief for plaintiff in error
on rehearing. Clayton Blakey, Moorfield
Storey, Counsel, pp. 21-23.


Mr. Fields also held that ordinances
were not unreasonable exercises of the
police power. The sanction of moral-
ity, of preponderant opinion, of the
traditions and habits of the commu-
nity were urged to count more than
logic in determining the reasonable-
ness of law. Moreover, the mere fact
that the ordinances limited the right
of a man to do with his own as he
pleases did not, in the judgment of
the City Solicitor, render them in-
valid since property rights are relative.
Living in cities was said to subject
men to restraints in the use of proper-
ty to which they were not subjected
in the open country. A maxim of the
common law sic utere tuo ut alienum
non laedas was quoted as supporting
the contention that the right to do
as one pleases with his own property
is limited by the fact that in using
that which is his own he must not
injure others.
The precise question which the
Louisville ordinance and by analogy
the Baltimore Ordinances placed be-
fore the Court was not in the judg-
ment of the City Solicitor whether
the ordinances were reasonable or un-
reasonable exercises of the police pow-
er. The question rather was, "Is it
plain and palpable that it has no real
or substantial relation to the public
health, safety, morals, or to the gen-
eral welfare?"24
Mr. Hawkins answered that the
limits of the legitimate exercise of the
police power had been reached and
passed in this case. He held, more-
over, that if no such limit existed the
police power would become another
delusive name for the supreme sover-

24 Field's Brief, pp. 17-30.

eignty of the state, to be exercised
free from constitutional restraint.
The Maryland Court of Appeals in
declaring the Baltimore Segregation
Ordinances Nos. 339 and 355 of 1913
unconstitutional held; First, that the
argument which justified these ordi-
nances on the ground that the races
could be legally separated in the use
of the railroads and schools did not
prevail. Secondly, that the argument
for racial purity was not involved in
the case at bar. The right which the
ordinance curtailed was the right of
the members of different races to dis-
pose of and rent property to each
other. Thirdly, that as desirable as it
was to promote the peace and to pre-
vent racial conflict, these aims could
not be achieved by laws which denied
to Negroes rights created or protected
by the Federal Constitution. It specifi-
cally held that the purpose of the
statutes of 1866 passed under the sanc-
tion of the Thirteenth Amendment
and practically reenacted under the
Fourteenth Amendment, 16 statute
144, was to protect colored people in
the purchase and enjoyment of prop-
erty. And finally, that depreciation of
property values might follow from
the presence of an undesirable white
neighbor who put his property to dis-
agreeable though lawful uses as well
as from the invasion of a white neigh-
borhood by Negroes. The court, there-
fore, concluded: "We think the at-
tempt to prevent the alienation of the
property in question to a person of
color was not a legitimate exercise of
the police power of the state and is
in direct violation of the fundamental
law enacted in the Fourteenth Amend-
ment to the Constitution preventing


interference with property rights ex-
cept by due process of law."25
The decision of the Court of Ap-
peals was interpreted by the colored
and white press alike as the death
blow to segregation. The Baltimore
American interpreted the decision to
mean that Negroes would be free to
move into residential blocks in which
the majority of the tenants were
white.26 Solicitor Fields admitted that
there was no use to discuss the matter
any further. The Afro-American indi-
cated that the final interment of seg-
regation meant that Negroes would
no longer be subjected to such hard-
ships as the one which forced them
to move their Young Men's Christian
Association from Dolphin and McCul-
loch Streets to Druid Hill Avenue.
During the segregation controversy a
portion of the white population had
also opposed the effort of Morgan Col-
lege, a Negro institution, to obtain a
more favorable location for itself by
purchasing a new site on Hartford
Certain social effects are observable
as a result of the entire controversy.
There is evidence that the discussion
of segregation inflamed the imagina-
tion of certain elements of the white
race. As a result of this they some-
times threw mud through the win-
dows of colored neighbors beside
25For the Opinion of the Court quota-
tions cited above cf. Thomas Jackson v.
State of Maryland (132 Md. 311-316, 1918),
especially p. 315, "The Supreme Court of
Georgia in Carey v. Atlanta (143 Georgia
192) in a case which arose prior to the
Louisville case reached essentially the same
26 Baltimore American, Feb. 28, 1918, "The
Death Blow to Segregation."
27 The Afro-American, Baltimore, March
1, 1918, "Court of Appeals Puts Quietus on
Fourth Attempt of City Solons to Say Where
Colored People Shall Live."

whom they had lived in peace for
many years.
It also brought in its wake the
habit of thinking in terms of separate
programs for white and black rather
than thinking in terms of the commu-
nity as a whole. Of this result a recent
survey of the The Negro Community
of Baltimore remarks:

"Segregation and separation have tended
to prevent the Negroes adequate social func-
tioning in the Baltimore community. At one
and the same time, the Negro must try to
serve his city and state while protecting and
serving his racial interests. This frequently
creates separate programs, separate institutions,
and separate considerations. Furthermore, this
dual system is financially expensive to the
community as well as to the taxpayers. The
reckoned cost of this separation and segrega-
tion, when measured in terms of delinquency
rates, separate institutions and agencies, would
show an astounding total. Yet, thereby is the
success of racial adjustment appraised. A by-
product of this ten years of segregation is
seen in a recent study of The Joint Com-
mittee on Housing of The State Board of
The Federal Housing Commission. According
to that report approximately twenty thousand
people, most of whom were Negroes, were
found living in areas of Baltimore which were
blighted, and already developing the charac-
teristics of the slum. A portion of this neigh-
borhood was declared unsuitable even for the
habitation of Negroes of the lower income
group. Another portion was described as usa-
ble only for Negro inhabitants unless industry
and commerce can absorb it. Dirt and smoke
nuisances are serious there. In the other por-
tion which was occupied by Negroes of the
higher income levels they are living in houses,
ill adapted to modern usage and built for
persons of a different economic level thirty
or forty years ago, while others are pur-
chasing houses, costly to buy, because of the
industrial value of the land and equally cost-
ly to repair because the buildings are old."28

Residential segregation is legally
dead, but the habits of thought, atti-
tudes and ethno-centrisms which it
fostered persist. These are reflected in
part by contracts into which white
28 Ira DeA. Reid.


neighbors sometimes enter and as a
result of which restrictive covenants
are placed in their deeds and wills
making the sale of property to Ne-
groes illegal.29
Another evidence of its former pres-
ence is the cultural poverty of areas
in which Negroes live. It was but an
easy step from excluding them from
neighborhoods, to excluding them
from participation in the artistic and
cultural life of the community, so
that the facilities at their disposal are
quite often second rate. This slows
down the rate of acculturation and
dampens the pride in community
achievement which it should be the
aim of civilization to promote.

29 A Baltimore case involving the use of
restrictive covenants, Edward Denniston v.
Mary Estelle Meade (173 Md. 295, 1937)
has been tested before the Maryland Court
of Appeals by Attorney W. A. C. Hughes
Jr. The Court held that the inhibitions of
the Fourteenth Amendment are upon the
power of the State and consequently do not
cover the cases of private action in which the
owners of property entered into contract
barring the sale of their property or its
occupancy by members of the African race.
Judge Bond dissented. The decision followed
the line of reasoning pursued by the United
States Supreme Court in a similar case, Cor-
rigan v. Buckley (271 U. S. 323-330, 1926)
which arose in the District of Columbia. The
Maryland Court held that as such an agree-
ment creates "an easement in the property of
each of them (it) is entitled to be recorded
so as to put purchasers of any such proper-
ties on notice of the agreement."

Beyond all this, segregation in Balti-
more, as in other cities in which it
has been practiced, has reduced the
feeling of neighborliness and good will
through reducing the area of con-
tact and limiting the interaction of
the races.
Dr. Robert Russa Moton has com-
mented upon the fact that as Negroes
take over the professional work of
physician, lawyer and dentist among
their own group there is less opportu-
nity for white people to know the in-
timate lives of Negroes. He also ob-
serves that their interest in the lives
of their servants is often limited to
mere professional interests. These facts
led him to remark:

"From these natural causes the white man's
knowledge of Negro life is diminishing and
the rate is accelerated by the present day
policy of segregation. This operates practic-
ally to make an ever widening gulf between
the two races which leaves each race, more
and more ignorant of the other. Without
contact there cannot be knowledge; segrega-
tion reduces contacts and so knowledge and
understanding decrease.With decreasing knowl-
edge comes increasing distrust and suspicion,
and these in turn engender prejudice and even
hatred. So a vicious circle is established whose
ultimate effects, unless counteracted, must be
a separation of the races into more or less
opposing camps, with results as disastrous
to the spirit of American Institutions as to
the genuine progress of both races."30

30 Robert Russa Moton, What the Negro
Thinks (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday
Doran & Company Inc., 1929), pp. 4-5.





TEN OF THE seventeen land-grant
colleges for Negroes replied to
letters sent this past school year to
determine the enrollment of students
in so-called industrial courses (agri-
culture, home economics, and mechan-
ic arts) as compared with the enroll-
ment figures of students registered in
the liberal arts courses of these land-
grant schools.
The registration totals for home
economics students have been included
in this study because of the fact that
home economics is considered, along
with agriculture and mechanic arts,
as one of the practical arts courses
and as such has been read into the
program of the majority of the land-
grant institutions of learning. Higher
education for women was not very
popular in the 1860's when the Morrill
Act, which provides specifically for
this type of education, was passed,
and that is a possible reason why the
Act does not list home economics spe-
cifically with other industrial arts.
These figures are not presented with
the view of making and validating
final and pertinent conclusions. The
reader may draw any number of con-
clusions from the tabulated enrollment
list which appears at the end of this
article. However, we do wish to focus
the attention of the management of
all our colleges-not only those who
superintend land-grant schools--on

these registration figures so that they
may determine whether or not a happy
balance is being maintained between
enrollment of students in industrial
education courses in land-grant col-
leges (for which purposes they were
founded) as compared with registra-
tion of students in the liberal arts de-
partments of these same institutions.
Examining the Morrill Act of 1862
one may see to what extent the land-
grant colleges, which provide mass
education for their respective states,
have departed from their original
aims, in means and in method, and in
viewpoint, and, if possible, find a jus-
tification for any change in objective
in face of the new demands of our
American Negro life. To quote:
"The proceeds so invested were to consti-
tute a perpetual fund, the interest of which
was to be appropriated by each state, which
may take and claim the benefit of -this act,
to the endowment, support, and maintenance
of at least one college where the leading ob-
ject shall be without excluding other scientific
and classical studies and including military
tactics, to teach such branches of learning
as are related to agriculture and the me-
chanic arts, in such manner as the legisla-
tures of the States may respectively prescribe,
in order to promote the liberal and practical
education of the industrial classes in the sev-
eral pursuits and professions of life."
It has been observed significantly
in many articles appearing in various
publications that Negro colleges have


not adapted their curricula to the
needs of their students. Attention too
has been called to the fact that many
have been admitted to the wrong de-
partment of study, and instead of the
college sending the student to the
school where he can get the type of
training that he needs, he is allowed
to remain and become a square peg in
a round hole.
If one glances backward to the be-
ginnings of the institutions mentioned
at the end in this study, he will find
out that they all started off with
strong emphasis upon the industrial
courses. But as was pointed out at
the last annual meeting of the Ne-
gro land-grant college presidents, men
are no longer going back to the farm
to produce foodstuffs. Because of the
multiplicity of machines and compe-
tition in the mechanical trades, there
is a lessened interest in industrial occu-
pations for men.
The trend in education has changed
now because the student wants to see
the practical relationship between his
classroom education and what is going
on outside the college's walls. What
he has read and discussed must be of
immediate use to him. The real issues
of the world concern socio-economic
events; hence the eagerness for in-
formation through heavy enrollment
in social science and government. The
student has to focus on the real world
because at any moment the trend of
socio-economic events might affect
him or his parents, and he will be
pulled out of the classroom. Therefore

many schools have developed a strong
liberal arts program, and in their gen-
eral plans lessened the emphasis on the
industrial courses.
There are two important points
raised by this situation. First of all,
it seems that there should be a happy
balance between enrollments in the
industrial and in the arts courses be-
cause in practically all of these states,
there are good liberal arts colleges
which supply the demand, to a certain
extent for that latter named branch
of study. In the second place, it seems
to the writer of this article that the
land-grant colleges should not neces-
sarily attract those students who want
a liberal arts program. A wiser plan
seems to be the setting up of a cooper-
ative program which allows each
school in the state to select its stu-
dents from the entire supply, sending
those who request admittance to a col-
lege not in keeping with their cultur-
al or vocational objectives to the proper
institution of learning. By so doing,
colleges will not lose materially in
enrollment themselves and at the
same time they will be creating and
developing an ethical attitude among
the students and administration of the
respective colleges that are involved.
Finally, it might be said that we
need good vocational guidance men in
our schools who can find out by scien-
tific, personal examination the needs
and capabilities.of students and direct
them to those institutions which will
best satisfy their personal ambitions.



Industrial Lib
Agriculture --- 45
Home Economics 81
Mechanic Arts 46
Agriculture -___ 104
Home Economics 106
Mechanic Arts 10
Industrial Arts 3
Agriculture 79
Home Economics 66
Mechanic Arts 78

Agriculture __ 124
Home Economics 119
243 234
Agriculture --_ 173
Home Economics 313
Mechanic Arts 74
609 364

l are Arts


Industrial Libel
Agriculture 133
Home Economics __ 127
Mechanic Arts 74

Agriculture 189
Home Economics 155
Mechanic Arts 36
106 380

237 1

al Arts




Agriculture 60
Home Economics 121
Mechanic Arts 42
223 392

Agriculture 24
Home Economics 67
Mechanic Arts 61
152 112

i :







.,. F O ,

,. A 0.. -

.*. .

,. ..L

.. ,;,j

University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs