Copyright 2015 Jasmine Danielle Parker
(DE)SEGREGATION IN POST-BROWN DALLAS, TEXAS: A HISTORICAL NARRATIVE ATTRIBUTING THE RESPONSE AND SOCIAL ACTIVISM EFFORTS OF AFRICAN AMERICAN DALLASITES, 1950s-1970s
BY
JASMINE DANIELLE PARKER
DISSERTATION
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Education Policy, Organization & Leadership with a concentration in Educational Administration and Leadership in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2015
Urbana, Illinois
Doctoral Committee:
Associate Professor Christopher M. Span, Chair Professor James D. Anderson Associate Professor Menah Pratt-Clarke, Esq. Associate Professor Yoon K. Pak Assistant Professor Lorenzo Baber
ii
ABSTRACT
This study examines the role appointed desegregation committees had on the evolution of the public schooling experience in Dallas, Texas during the mid-twentieth century. It has a twofold purpose dating back to the eras commonly referred to as Plessy and Brown, respectively. On May 17, 1954, the Supreme Court of the United States presented to the world its reasoning in the case of Brown v.
Board of Education. The Court declared legally segregated public schooling facilities unconstitutional. However, this original decision of the Court failed to enunciate how and when school districts were to end segregated schooling. In a later decision, known as Brown II, the organizational strategies and implementation responsibilities in desegregation plans were designated the responsibility of city leadership, school boards, and local courts of law. Resultantly, this investigation seeks to address the relationship between local culture, civic leaders, and federal requirements, specifically their influence and contribution, as it relates to the legal journey of creating institutionally desegregated facilities. These relationships are investigated to better understand the themes of access and equal opportunity when examining improved schooling conditions in the Dallas Independent School District. Through the use of discourse analysis and narrative storytelling via: interviews, newspapers, handwritten letters, judicial proceedings, judge’s notes, scholastic assessments, audio recordings, and field reports, this investigative study examines how Dallas, a once segregated Southwestern city, responded to the Brown rulings by utilizing organized desegregation strategies and tactics. Though civil rights history on the city of Dallas remains fragmented, this study seeks to fill gaps in the literature pertaining to Texas’ history of discrimination and the desegregation of the Dallas Independent School District. iii
For my mother and father. Thank you for fanning the flame within my soul. . .
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Thank you to the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign College of Education for awarding me the 2014 Hardie Dissertation Award to alleviate dissertation costs. I also bid my sincerest appreciation to the curators and archivists at the following archives: The University of
Texas at Austin Briscoe Center for American History, Dallas Public Library: Texas/Dallas
History & Archives Division, Texas State Historical Association, and University of Dallas
Library & Archives, Professor Nancy O’Brien, Head of Social Science, Health, and Education
Library (SSHEL) at the University of Illinois, and the Southern Methodist University Dedman
School of Law: Underwood Law Library- Litigation Archives Division, for their earnest support and assistance throughout my research process. Thank you all for allowing me to collect data at your archives. I especially am grateful to SMU Dedman School of Law for allowing me to collect data as the summer 2013 resident researcher. For all of your consideration and support, I thank and appreciate you: Professor Gail Daly: Dean of Library, Mr. Gregory Ivy: Associate
Director of Library, Winston Tubbs, Christopher Molinar, Randell Richmond, Sandra Thrope, and affiliated SMU Dedman School of Law circulation staff.
Last but most important, from the very depths of my soul I thank my very supportive and loving parents, Mr. Dennis and Chandra Parker. Your love for me is unconditional and everlasting. You have always listened to my hopes, believed in my dreams, and have cheered me on every step of the way. Thank you for being my light in a dark place, my sunshine on cloudy days, and for acknowledging the rainbows after every storm. Thank you for being my lifelong cheerleaders! With humility and sincere appreciation, thank you to each of you.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROLOGUE ………………………………………………………………………….………… vi
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………...... 1
CHAPTER 2: HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF DALLAS, 1900-1950 ……………………….. 18
CHAPTER 3: BROWN v. BOARD OF EDUCATION AND
THE DALLAS RESPONSE, 1950s-1960s …………………………………………...……….. 27
CHAPTER 4: AFRICAN AMERICAN LEGAL ACTIVISM IN DALLAS, 1960s-1970s ...… 51
CHAPTER 5: POST-TASBY DALLAS, 1970s AND BEYOND …………………………...... 99
BIBLIOGRAPHY……………….…………………………………………………………..… 107
APPENDIX: TABLES……………………………………………………………………….. 133
vi
PROLOGUE
Today is March 20, 2014. As I sit outside in Texas on my parents’ back porch, the cool breeze and warm sun immediately greet me with another day of life-awakening prophecy that “I am here, I am alive. Appreciate this moment.” It feels like a quintessential day, as if I were walking along the perfectly positioned beaches of southern California. I inhale, close my eyes, and imagine. My thoughts run wild with images, quotes, and ideas of what it means to be alive, living a worthwhile life that is superior to any mere form of simple existence. I exhale pictures of perfection and am immediately subdued in a state of nostalgia. First, I see children bike-riding through the residential streets of my beloved Dallas, just as I had when I was a child. I see images of overly-saturated, and oozing, large blue coconut snow cones waiting to be devoured by all whom relish in the sight of the sun. I then hear dogs barking and bees buzzing in only the way that they can. But, the question still looms. “What does it mean to live?” crosses my mind more times than I would ever like to admit. And today, is one of those days. Startled by my subconscious yet oblivious to the environment around me, somehow I reemerge myself in the now, and see life happening in the present. It is in the clear blue sky, the enchanted sounds of birds singing, the sight of yellow butterflies flying, the feel of the crisp spring wind against my face, and the subtle burn of the beaming sun on my legs that makes me appreciate life and all of its liveliness. Yet, euphoric days like this also become commonplace reminders that spring is here and has thus simultaneously ushered out its previous season, winter. Today is the day of transition.
Gazing across the field, I am reminded of an unfortunately cold, harsh yesterday. The sight of tall brown trees with barren limbs and a homogenous color palate are constant reminders vii of the remnants of days gone by. As a child and native Texan, I always enjoyed the winter. Born on the day of the winter solstice, I have always believed winter to be a season of magic and wonder. Since childhood, I have lived my life delighting in the thought that winter, at the center of its purpose, lays the nucleus of transformation. For many, winter is the genesis of emotions like: sorrow, pain, hurt, and agony. Yet, it is also the birthplace of feelings of comfort, belonging, knowing, and ironically, uncertainty. Winter, while excruciating for many people, is a necessary experience for everyone. Without it, no other season may properly exist. Just as the sight of fallen leafs calls us to be a little more grateful for the reinvigoration of bountiful trees and blooming fields of endless brightly colored flowers, the endurance of pain and suffering teaches us all to have a greater appreciation for sincere love and human kindness in our everyday living. As I sit here and mentally journey over the past few weeks of my life, I feel indebted to express why I am here, in Dallas, at this very moment. Sitting on my parents’ back porch, taking in the spring solstice, I am drawn to narrate the life and sudden death of my late grandfather, whom I have affectionately called “Big Daddy” since I was a child. His death is the reason I am here. He is the reason that in this very moment, there is no other place I would rather be. Big
Daddy, and countless other unsung African American thought provokers, pioneered the journey of forcing the United States government to acknowledge and reconsider the need for equality of civil rights and opportunities for all American people. The forefathers of the Civil Rights
Movement paved the way for us all to enjoy a fairer way of life, today. We are because our elders were. It is the extraordinary work of seemingly ordinary people whom fearlessly sacrificed their lives in the face of danger, hopeful that their efforts would bring about the positive shaping of a more equal and democratic American culture. My grandfather assisted in this effort and his viii service to this country and global society will forever live on. His life and lived experiences is what I celebrate. His heart is what I will always love and cherish.
My maternal grandfather, Willard Lewis, died on his farm after riding his Texas-sized and bigger than life tractor, when attempting to feed his cows, at the age of eighty-eight years old, on a cold winter evening in February 2014. Yet, while his death is to be mourned temporarily, he has left behind a tremendous lifework that is to be honored eternally. Born on
May 26, 1925 in Titus County, Texas, Willard Lewis was a typical southwestern child who enjoyed farm life in a de jure segregated state. He attended formal schooling and became a graduate of the “Colored-only” Booker T. Washington High School. Prior to dedicating thirty years of service to Petrofina Oil Refinery, my grandfather served in active military combat in
World War II. It was this assignment that led him to embark on addressing our national agenda.
Drafted at a very young age, Big Daddy was a member of the then racially-segregated
92nd Infantry, Buffalo Division. Rising to the rank of sergeant, he became an honorable United
States Army Veteran after completing extensive tours in both Italy and Switzerland. While braving physical danger on behalf of democracy everywhere, many African American military soldiers like my beloved grandfather experienced substandard living and employment accommodations, thereby causing them to unite in the quest for equality of treatment in all capacities. Coined as the “Double V” campaign, to signify dual achievement in the mission to eradicate fascism abroad as well as the victorious movement in bringing about true democracy and desegregation at home, many historians share the belief that it was those admirable soldiers of World War II whom formally began the American Civil Rights Movement of the 1940s to
1960s. ix
Throughout his life, my grandfather continuously paved the way for people of color, whether knowingly or unconsciously. For instance, the success of the Double V Campaign as well as the progressive work of civil rights activists nationwide, led to the Supreme Court of the
United States ruling on May 17, 1954, that legally segregated schools were inherently unequal and unconstitutional. Resulting from this, progressive legal and grassroots efforts also led to the creation of now-commonplace, and federally-supported, racially diverse magnet schools.
Additionally, innovative business and civic-minded work by my grandfather, in his hometown of
Mt. Pleasant, Texas, led to the city honoring him, by designating a street-sign in his name.
Although his death is the winter of our family’s sorrow and heartache, it is the story of my grandfather’s life and his dedication to making the world a more just and friendly place that is our springtime and shower of hope.
Such a transcending life story has allowed me to research and narrate the desegregation and transformation of our society, as seen through Texan eyes. The following narrative history is more than the journey of desegregating a city. It is an homage to the many unknown civic and community leaders who courageously fought for justice and equality of opportunity in the public schooling, voting, and social settings of a state that has historically discriminated against its own residents.
After a harsh winter, with snow and ice forming into a slosh of water, flowers are nurtured and then bloom, once again. The end of a wintery sadness brings about a glow of inspirational sunshine. I am eternally grateful to my grandfather for sharing his summer and springtime of life with me. 1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Practically eclipsed in the archives of Dallas’ post-Brown desegregation history has been a complete account of the city’s position on race relations. Although Dallas’ city history is fragmented, few narratives exist that describes and highlights the work of Dallas’ White civic leaders. Contrastingly, only portions of the social, political, legal, and educational history of
Dallas’ African American populace have been produced and made known. In fact, a more complete historiography that chronicles African American activism has largely been fragmented and overlooked. As Harvey J. Graff effectually expressed, “only recently have local libraries and historical societies actively sought to collect basic materials documenting the city’s history. . . .
[Therefore] major gaps still exist, especially for the study of ordinary people and racial-ethnic minority groups.”1 This study seeks to fill gaps in the literature as it relates to the desegregation of the Dallas Independent School District.
While illustrating the historical vestiges of Dallas, neither Royce Hansan, William R.
Carmack, Harvey J. Graff, Glenn M. Linden—the city’s chief desegregation historians and field reporters—placed much emphasis on how the determination and agility of ordinary African
Americans contributed to the demise of segregation throughout the city proper. Both Hansan and
Carmack historicized the influence of Dallas’ White business elite on the city’s political economy. Specifically, Hansan and Carmack, respectively, chronicled the refined campaign efforts of the Dallas Citizens Council and the Bloom Advertising Agency during their quest to prevent mass eruption as the city addressed segregation. Nonetheless, neither Hansan nor
Carmack addressed the pivotal role African Americans played in the dismantling of subservient
1 Harvey J. Graff, The Dallas Myth: The Making and Unmaking of an American City (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2008), xv. 2 and oppressive conditions historically entrusted to them. Similarly, Harvey J. Graff characterized the privilege, power, propaganda, and agenda of business-rooted city leaders, as the quintessential advocates for local autonomy and regulation of all things governing “the Dallas way.”2 Graff also stopped short of identifying how historically oppressed groups worked to combat marginalization. Contrasting this, the historian Glenn M. Linden provided a large-scale history of Dallas’ reasoning and platform regarding race-relations and political issues. Although
Linden provided a historiography of Dallas’ stance on governance and social policy, he did so without any in-depth analysis as for the role commonplace African Americans played in their own quest for liberation.3 An example of this is apparent when interpreting historian Linden’s account of the city’s court-enforced public school desegregation efforts.
Despite such gaps in literature, Dallas’ journey to achieve school access is not a completely indescribable or unaccountable sequence of events. Although the more recognized and distinguished Dallas historians neglected to contextualize the impact and proactive attitude of the city’s African American community, insightful examinations exists concerning the many steps taken in order to achieve equality of opportunity, access, and school desegregation. Yet, much of this historical analysis has remained fragmented, under-researched, overlooked, and/or
2 The phrase “The Dallas Way” will appear throughout this text. “The Dallas Way” refers to the ways in which Dallas leaders addressed and resolved disputes. To better contextualize “The Dallas Way,” the historian Harvey J. Graff reasoned that “Racism indelibly marked—and continues to mark—life in Dallas. Over the full span of the city’s history, both implicitly and explicitly sanctioned violence sent clear messages about where power lay [sic]. . . . A frequent refrain of The Dallas Way was a not-so-veiled threat to preserve order by any means necessary—persuasion if possible, but violence if not. Dallas could be embarrassed by its own extremism. Dallas was long known as a rough-and-tumble place, a wide-open city in which certain levels of personal violence was accepted. But when its reputation threatened to harm the city’s image as a stable place to do business, civic leaders suppressed violent conflicts. Instances in which extremism overstepped this invisible line included the Klan; attacks on civil rights; police violence against minorities; illegal conduct by police, public officeholders. . . . That, of course, had been the Dallas Way. Over time, especially after the Kennedy assassination, managing extremist violence to secure social order and maintain control increasingly became ‘The Dallas Way.’” Harvey Graff, The Dallas Myth, 137-138.
3 Glenn M. Linden, Desegregating Schools in Dallas: Four Decades in the Federal Courts (Dallas: Three Forks Press, 1995). 3 believed to be nonessential to the overall story describing the makings of the city. Overall, current historiographies of Dallas do little to assess the ways in which African American community members, both individualized and organizational, civically influenced the social and political economy of North Texas pre and post-Brown.
In recalling the calculated and contrived partnership between African American community leaders and traditionally conservative White leaders, historians have unilaterally interpreted the platform of the African American community in its entirety as weak, combative, and un-desiring of change. Yet, this perspective fails to adequately offer an unbiased point of view. Such a perception fails to take into account the strategy of the African American community in utilizing the civic leadership of the city to obtain equality of rights as defined by the Court.
While historically unrepresented in the city’s history, the grassroots work and untold narratives of African Americans in Dallas public schools during this epoch did more than initialize access for “Negro” students. Their actions, similar to those taken by freedmen who created and implemented universal education, overtime, helped to transform the city’s racial climate and treatment of its African American populace once desegregated schools became a federal mandate for which the state of Texas was required to uphold.4 However, research remains insufficient on this topic.
4 Christopher M. Span, "Citizen or Laborer?: The Social Purposed of Black Schooling in Reconstruction Mississippi, 1862-1875" (PhD diss., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2001). 4
Thesis
Successfully arguing that African American Dallasites were just as proactive, earnest, and involved as other civic organizations and racial groups in the conversation of desegregation is incredibly challenging. To summarize scholar Joseph M. Phillips, Dallas is a city that historically seeks to escape fact to recreate its own domineering and unbreakable history.5 While there has been limited scholarship that has captured an account of race-relations between groups of people in Dallas, the abovementioned constraints and restrictions in scope of study should not be exclusively placed on the activism and participation of the African American community.
Researching the public school movement of African Americans in Dallas before and after Brown v. Board of Education directly challenges the larger narrative of Dallas for which few written and oral recordings pay tribute. Because minimum research sufficiently archived the journey, W.
Marvin Dulaney’s question remains plausible, “What happened to the Civil Rights [specifically the school rights] Movement in Dallas, Texas [italics mine]?”6 Therefore, it is imperative to provide a more complete depiction of the African American experience in Dallas during the dismantling of the “separate but equal” doctrine. A brief historiography assessing the conditions of African Americans in Dallas pre-dating, then during, this time period will largely stand to fulfill this query.
Discovering firsthand accounts of African American Dallasites, including: direct testimony, personal communication, and published community broadcasts that are all encompassing of perspectives, ideologies, and desired wills of the community in the addressing
5 Joseph Michael Phillips, "The Fire This Time: The Battle over Racial, Regional and Religious Identities in Dallas, Texas, 1860-1990" (PhD diss., University of Texas at Austin, 2002).
6 W. Marvin Dulaney, "Essays on the American Civil Rights Movement," in What Ever Happened to the Civil Rights Movement in Dallas, Texas?, eds. W. Marvin Dulaney and Kathleen Underwood (College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 1993). 5 of institutional subordination is imperative. Nonetheless, the unrelenting desire of African
American Dallasites to unhinge the institutional and inundated structure of school segregation throughout Dallas is difficult to examine yet remains necessary. To advance the effort of narrating a rather untold history, Henry Allen Bullock’s framework of answering the largely unobserved through the observed remains practicable. The overarching question of this study will be assessed within this framework of questioning: What happened to the Dallas Independent
School District after Brown I and II?7 To answer the aforementioned inquiry, this study seeks to substantiate from whose vantage point Dallas desegregation events occurred. To paraphrase the historian Vanessa Siddle Walker, “this is the part of segregated [and desegregated individual and communal history] that has been too little addressed.”8
Method & Source Considerations
This study offers a discourse analysis of events that shaped the Dallas Independent
School District’s desegregation schooling history. Additionally, the implementation of legal analysis and reasoning were also undertaken to provide a more accurate civil rights depiction that involved the African American community and the Dallas Independent School District. While it directly relates to and considers the African American and White perspective—oral interviews,
7 In the spring of 1954, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) announced their decision in the case of Brown et al. v. Board of Education, Topeka, Kansas et al. In this decision, the SCOTUS ruled that “separate but equal” educational institutions were inherently unequal. Therein, the SCOTUS ruled that all legally segregated public schools serving minors be desegregated. However, in their decision-making announcement, the SCOTUS did not use specificity as to how nor when the public schools had to be desegregated. Because of this, the majority of states and cities practicing under legal public school segregation continued such traditions. Desegregation was not occurring. Given their original oversight as to procedural implementation, one year later this portion of the Brown I remedy came before the Supreme Court of the United States. Coined as “Brown II,” the SCOTUS decided that it would be the responsibility of the state and localities to make conscious desegregation efforts “with all deliberate speed.” In sum, Brown I has been known as the decision that theoretically struck down conscious racism and difference in America’s public schools. On the other hand, historians and lawmakers have widely understood Brown II to have been responsible for enforcing the visible transformation of the public schools.
8 Vanessa Siddle Walker, Their Highest Potential: An African American School Community in the Segregated South (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1996), 5. 6 personal correspondence and testimony, governmental field reports, civic organizational group records, ministerial and congregational meeting records, et cetera—where feasible, will be employed. This history will also be drawn from a variety of primary case documents that authentically contextualizes the meaning and purpose rooted in the litigation assessed.
Nevertheless, these forms of material evidence—newspapers, organizational records and requests, amicus curiae briefs, scholarly reports and assessments, case law proceedings and adjudications, educational statistics, personal notes and correspondence, videos, and photographs—offer a legitimate secondhand representation of the point of view, attitudes, beliefs, and goals held by both the African American and White communities, in the pursuit of equality of treatment in schools and society. 9 Therefore, while this study initially delivers a historical overview of African American schooling experiences prior to Brown v. Board of
Education, Topeka, Kansas (1954-1955), the majority of this study focuses on the ways in which
White civic and African American community leaders affected social equality efforts in the
Dallas Independent School District (DISD) from 1955-1976.
To complete this study, I obtained a great deal of legal research via the Thomas Reuters supported legal database Westlaw and Westlaw Next. However, given the scarcity of collected material and the fact that some cases died in the district court, I utilized the following entities to access both legal proceedings as well as other secondary documentation surrounding the cases assessed: Dallas Public Library: Dallas/Texas History & Archives Division, Texas State
9 Throughout this study, I utilize news clippings from major, and locally founded news distributors like the Dallas Morning News, as well as archived circulations from now defunct Dallas Tribune, Dallas Express, and Dallas Times Herald. This was done to assess, at a macro level, the social climate of the city as it pertained to schooling, civil rights, and desegregation. Further, to better articulate the voice of the African American community, I utilized archived meeting records and oral recordings obtained by the Tri-Ethnic Committee, whose sole responsibility upon its founding was the establishment of effective desegregation school plans for the city’s school district. The use of multiple primary and secondary archived data was done with the intention of examining the ways in which access to educational opportunity has transformed and affected the schooling experiences of Dallas public school students. 7
Historical Association, University of Dallas Library and Archives, and The University of Texas at Austin Briscoe Center for American History. Additionally, the desegregation case adjudicated in the Dallas Independent School District that I primarily undertook in my research is Tasby v.
Estes. Following its final ruling in 2003, all primary documentation was donated to the Southern
Methodist University Dedman School of Law-Underwood Law Library: Litigation Archives
Division, located in Dallas, Texas. As the Underwood Law Library’s summer 2013 resident researcher I successfully secured primary documentation regarding this case.
Significance
Many historians agree that school districts did not show a “good faith start” at resolving segregation practices following the Brown II decision. Regardless of individual and organizational perspective, the Warren Court demanded that states legitimizing de jure segregation exhibit “a good faith start” to desegregate its schools. Therefore, the year 1955 is monumental on two accords. As a causal link to the Brown II ruling, 1955 marked the first public school desegregation lawsuit on the behalf of African American students in the Dallas
Independent School District. Numerous suits were filed in which plaintiffs requested equality of access to schooling opportunity. Thus, the history of desegregation in Dallas can be studied within two legal bookends. Bell v. Rippy (1955) marks the first socially and educationally- conscious claim against the district, while 1976 marks the enforcement of a second Dallas desegregation plan, as crafted by a second yet more racially-inclusive civic organization—the
Dallas Alliance. In adhering to court-enforced mandates regarding desegregation, Dallas civic leaders hoped to maintain its White city populace. While the city’s leadership crafted enticing school choice options, the collection of social and institutional transformations contributed to significant White flight. The indisputable surge of White flight altered the Dallas Independent 8
School District’s student demographic significantly. Based upon actions taken in other cities,
White flight was a foreseeable reaction to desegregation efforts in Dallas.
Consequently, from 1955-1976 several White business executives organized and proposed a marginalized and sparsely implemented desegregation plan. Simultaneously, the city of Dallas began a tremendously quiet, however vanity-driven, civic conquest. This marketing campaign forced the city to uphold Brown’s legal precedence in the highest esteem for the sake of law and order. The proposed plan offered to maintain the educational right of residents. Yet, as African American public sentiment and dissatisfaction mounted in response to the subservient position African Americans were subjectively conditioned to undertake, the broad mission of the
Civil Rights Movement was promoted.
Few would have known that both famous and unsung leaders in the African American community would emerge. A decade previous, not many would have assumed that the National
Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) would reorganize its leadership and platforms in Dallas in such a way that it became locally invested in alleviating the plight that burdened African American Dallasites. Several others did not expect the NAACP to embark on a city-level campaign endeavor to immediately desegregate public schools. Responsible for the peaceful assimilation of African Americans children into public schools, leaders within Dallas’
African American community consistently demanded equality of treatment. Nonetheless, even fewer foresaw the partnership between White conservatives and progressive leaders in Dallas’
African American community. Indeed, the writers behind the city’s first desegregation initiatives were unlikely collaborative advocates for desegregation. Similarly, even fewer would have supposed that the desegregation efforts of Dallasites would be glamorized nationwide by Life
Magazine and other media outlets, thus reinforcing the picturesque image of Dallas. 9
Among the multiple desegregation campaigns to occur over this twenty-year period were proposals offered by White conservatives. Influential conservatives in Dallas continually debated on the issue of desegregation and its predetermined impact on the city’s economy. Argued routinely was the substantial interconnection between maintaining a “traditional” way of life in
Dallas and the image of the city. However, the ways in which desegregated schools would affect the city’s overall perception and environment were of top priority to civic leaders, African
American and White alike. Thus, the chief query surrounding how best to force Dallas’ “Negro” and White populations to peacefully assemble consumed the conversations and platforms of all civic leaders, organizations, and groups concerned with the organizational structure of a desegregated Dallas Independent School District.
As previously mentioned, Dallas began its educational litigation quest to desegregate its schools at the height of strife and turmoil. These efforts ran counterproductive to the methods employed by the City of Dallas in the addressing of large-scale nonviolent approaches during the
Civil Rights Movement. During this time period, the primary concern to elite White Dallasites was the need to suppress the moral viewpoint and disdain held by the majority of Dallas’ White residents in the matter of desegregation. Many business and political leaders hoped to develop an effective plan for a peaceful desegregation effort to be carried out by the city. The purpose of this was to avoid media scrutiny, violence, and mass demonstrations such as those experienced in
Little Rock, Arkansas and New Orleans, Louisiana.10 While it is noted that initial steps to desegregate Dallas public schools began in 1961, questions lingered surrounding how best to conservatively desegregate while also appeasing the decree of the Court. Yet, the desire to identify attitudes and beliefs held within the African American community regarding
10 Melba Pattillo Beals, Warriors Don't Cry: Searing Memoir of Battle to Integrate Little Rock (New York: Washington Square Press, 1995). 10 desegregation was not a priority. Complementary to this, many White community members viewed desegregation efforts as inessential and a hindrance to the maintaining of the flawless image of Dallas.
Differences between the journey toward social equality for African American and White
Dallasites also indicate differences of priorities. Where African American Dallasites historically sought justice in court as a means of receiving equity, political empowerment, and educational liberation, White Dallasites sought to control and minimize potential disagreement surrounding the city’s desegregation measures. Where many African American Dallasites banded together in unison under umbrella organizations like the NAACP and the Dallas Negro Chamber of
Commerce, White Dallasites were chiefly concerned with crafting and adopting measures to curtail the possibility of disruptive public protest. White civic leaders were plagued with the need to indemnify and maintain the quiet peace and calm spirit that is Dallas. Most White civic leaders in Dallas controlled the image of the city, and thus worked to prioritize the maintenance of Dallas as the ideal place to start a business or raise a family. Specifically, elite White
Dallasites exemplified dual consciousness because they held a personal and financial stake in the city’s need to maintain a successful, yet slow, desegregation effort. On the other hand, most
African American Dallasites remained unhappy, dissatisfied, and upset due to slow progress.
African American Dallasites also faced the disappointing realization that many Dallasites did not find significant value or importance in desegregating the city or its schools. As of 1960, where
White Dallasites saw desegregation as “the coming” that was unavoidable, African American
Dallasites viewed mandated desegregation as the landmark moment the Supreme Court admitted to historic racial injustices. Not only this, African American Dallasites believed the Court was upholding the opinion of the oppressed by expressing society’s need to make equitable and 11 conscious corrections thenceforth. Resulting from this was strengthened grassroots activism within the African American community of Dallas.
Still, the Brown decision failed to radically alter the landscape of public schooling in the way the Warren Court had envisioned. Few people would have known the grave difficulty that foreshadowed the implementation of the legal mandate prescribed by Brown.11 Juxtaposed to this ruling was the presence of the Civil Rights Movement by countless African Americans, in the quest for equal treatment according to the law, and as its by-product equal opportunity. Yet,
African American communities throughout the nation endured the harsh reality riots, violence, and lynching’s brought in the search for equality. As Little Rock was abruptly thrust to the epicenter battleground between systemic federal and state-level authority, magnified as its opposite and the epitome of nonviolent desegregation success was the uniform account of Dallas,
Texas.
Although glamorized as a city that successfully and peacefully desegregated within a timely response per Brown II, virtually unaccounted for in the social and educational history of
Dallas is the unbiased recollection of the schooling experience of African Americans.
Specifically undocumented are narratives of students who personally experienced attending both segregated and (de)segregated schools. Also warranting specific and substantive review is the role of the African American community and its civic leadership, in the fight for equality of treatment and opportunity within Dallas public schools. As such, the question: “What role did
African American Dallasites play in the desegregation of the Dallas Independent School
District?” is a cross-disciplinary query that spans the fields of history, law, and sociology.
Routinely silenced within a controlled environment lies the untold and unbiased voice of Dallas’
11 Derrick A. Bell Jr, "Serving Two Masters: Integration Ideals and Client Interests in School Desegregation Litigation," Yale Law Journal 85 (1975). 12
African American community during this era. This fundamental perspective serves as a voice and additional principle to the essential aim of this investigation’s intention.
Study’s Outline
For this reason, to best articulate the educational history of Dallas’ African Americans community in the twentieth century, this inquiry is divided into three themes spanning five chapters. The themes approached in this study are: the establishment of Dallas and its race relations, Dallas attitudes and beliefs, and Dallas’ school-based legal journey. The utilization of discourse analysis and legal reasoning is the primary focus of this dissertation. Chapter one serves as an introduction and outline to the study. While this introductory chapter illustrates this investigation’s thesis and outline, the following four chapters specifically seeks to examine, explain, analyze, and summarize the discourse and legal reasoning surrounding segregation and methods taken to eradicate its presence within institutional structures.
Chapter two conveys general demographical data on the state of Texas, and the city of
Dallas specifically, from the early to mid-twentieth century. Chapter two also pertains to the business and social discourse regarding segregation and schooling experiences. This chapter is an account of the first theme studied. It includes the years 1900-1950, leading to the pivotal
Brown ruling. This chapter describes the social and educational experiences of Dallas students as they attended school under the guise of the “separate but equal” doctrine. Because this study examines the historical schooling experience of Dallas public school students during the era of legalized segregation, this chapter serves to highlight some of the challenges with ending school desegregation. The proceeding chapters substantively and more accurately provide rationale regarding how Dallasites interpreted federal law in the district’s educational litigation rulings concerning desegregation efforts. More specifically, following the historiography of Dallas are 13 chapters highlighting the attitude and socially-conscious platforms of the African American and
White communities.
Concomitantly, chapter three begins theme two and records the attitude and perspective of African American and White Dallasites as it relates to public school desegregation following the Brown decision. While chapter three is a social and policy oriented inquisition, it initially provides a historical account of Brown v. Board of Education. Following this, chapter three offers a civil rights narrative on African American activism in Dallas as it relates to newly acknowledged federal and civil liberties. Further, this chapter assesses the power of White business leaders in defying the Supreme Court’s decision to create desegregated schooling spaces. The multiple restrictions put in place by some of Dallas’ White community leaders to prolong desegregation efforts are examined throughout this chapter. These actions, in many ways, curtailed the quality of living for many African American Dallasites. Thus, the years
1950s-1960s are studied in chapter three.
Chapter four serves a twofold purpose. First, chapter four is an account of the last theme studied. Chapter four seeks to examine the organized social and legal capital, as well as activism strategies, of the African American community of Dallas. Subsequently, the other purpose of chapter four is to offer a narration of the legal journey by African Americans Dallasites in the fight against segregated public schools. Thus, this chapter documents and assesses the ways in which the national Civil Rights Movement agenda became a localized grassroots effort in Dallas,
Texas vis-à-vis acts of legal protest for schooling equality. As such, in a qualitative format, chapter four presents the school rights and legal journey of Dallas’ African American populace through the use of primary and secondary data. Specifically, chapter four examines the litigation- infused local school rights efforts of Dallas residents as they occurred during the 1960s-1970s. 14
While it is noted that the 1970 filed Tasby v. Estes case is responsible for having desegregated the Dallas Independent School District by 2003, school rights-related litigation efforts formally ensured in Dallas immediately following the Brown v. Board of Education II decision of 1955. In fact, the first education lawsuit filed against the district was Bell v. Rippy
(1955). Complementary, the year 1955 also marks the initial request by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) to the Dallas Independent School District
(DISD) to immediately resolve its dual schooling structure. Yet, as was written, local governance lawfully made and enforced a “separate but equal” living environment throughout Dallas, especially its schools. Thus to be sure and accurate, chapter four primarily examines the long yet persistent journey of African Americans seeking a unitary school system and desegregated way of life in Dallas, Texas. Just as Bell v. Rippy became the original suit filed against the district, the cases of Brown v. Rippy (1955-1956), Borders v. Rippy (1957), and Boson v. Rippy (1960) followed. Although synthesized throughout this chapter, the Boson denial by the Fifth Circuit
Court of Appeals is indirectly responsible for the implementation of the district’s first desegregation plan, in September 1961. The “salt-and-pepper” and “stair-step” plans proposed in the 1960s would be the first of many desegregation strategies contemplated by the city.
Complementary to this, while it has been established that the Dallas Citizens Council enlisted the support of seven African American leaders in the Dallas community to aid in desegregation planning initiatives, the underlying reasons and motivations for this has remained unclear, or at best contradictory. Nonetheless, the activism of African American Dallasites in demanding equal treatment resulted in joint civic partnerships between the African American and White professional communities of the city. It would not be until the filing of Tasby v. Estes, however, that the Dallas Independent School District would make an earnest effort to desegregate its 15 schools. Thus, Tasby is essential to this investigative study. To better situate the impact Tasby v.
Estes has had on contemporary schooling, a more complete legal narration concerning school desegregation in Dallas is necessary.
Therefore, chapter four seeks to highlight the sociopolitical and legal discourses in the city of Dallas, during the height of the Dallas Independent School District transformation. To do this, evolved perspectives and beliefs held by community members and civic leaders are documented in this chapter. The review of an array of beliefs was undertaken to better situate and assess the change of viewpoints, opinions, and sociopolitical ideals overtime. Although
Tasby, and with it—acceptable methods of desegregation strategies and measures remained in the custody of the court throughout its lengthy litigation, this chapter chronicles the voice of the
African American community in regards to the onset of Tasby. It also, subsequently, records the strengthened power and direct action initiatives by some members of Dallas’ African American community who, thereby, shaped its political economy.
Chapter five concludes this investigative study. It summarizes the demographic shift of
African American and White students attending the Dallas Independent School District in the years following Tasby. Spanning the 1970s and beyond, chapter five also offers a concluding viewpoint as to how school rights activism transformed the serving population of DISD. In particular, chapter five illustrates the 1970s mass exodus of White families whom departed the city of Dallas proper for Dallas suburban life. Some of the attitudes and political mindsets of the
Dallas civic community are analyzed and concluded. Nevertheless, this chapter summarizes the journey taken by African American Dallasites to dismantle dual schooling systems. Therefore, chapter five seeks to resolve whether the Dallas Independent School District effectually desegregated in the year’s post-Brown. To better contextualize public school desegregation in 16
Dallas over time, demographical statistics and voices of the African American, White, and legal communities are used to offer a variance of perspectives concerning school access.
It is evident, however, that African American Dallasites overwhelmingly and without doubt desired to dismantle dual schooling programs. This can be seen from the moment Brown v.
Board of Education was ruled on May 17, 1954, to the day a unitary schooling system emerged in the city. Also evident is that most African American Dallasites desired to receive equal treatment in schools while White civic leaders sought to suppress African American activism.
Whereas White civic leaders attempted to indoctrinate residents into accepting a slow and conservative desegregation plan, so as to prevent the potential tainting of the Dallas image and business-rooted political economy, rather transparent is that most African American Dallasites unrelentingly desired to take responsibility for their own educational and political interest.
Overtime, the continued push by the African American community to ensure that the Dallas
Independent School District complied with federal jurisprudence affected the racial composition of the students it served. Disdain toward forced student busing, by both African American and
White parents, was one factor that was responsible for transforming the racial makeup of Dallas public schools. White flight was ultimately responsible for the drastic transformation of the
Dallas Independent School District. Resultantly, chapter five summates this narrative by intertwining this study’s historiography with the effects of judicial review on an organizational system. Enunciating this examination is a chart that depicts the district’s racial transformation over the years.
While this study only speaks to the vocal redefinition of Dallas’ African American community, not fully addressed in this study is the grassroots activism by African American
Dallasites that persisted past 1976 and has continued on to the present. African American 17
Dallasites, as never before, enjoyed the right to utilize law and order with the intention of tangibly improving and receiving quality of access to education, opportunity, and correspondingly—strengthened and assertively demanded political power. In large part, the
African American community of Dallas took responsibility and ownership for its educational fate. In summary, while contextualizing the ways in which historical events affected society nationwide and locally, this chapter’s analysis identifies African American Dallasites’ overall expectations of desegregated education and how such expectations were to be articulated and implemented through local governance and the schooling system.
Still unanswered, however, are two central questions. These questions will assist in sufficing the overall inquiry of this study. They directly relate and complement each other. What happened to the Dallas Independent School District after Brown, and from whose vantage point?
The second research inquiry is borrowed from historians Henry Allen Bullock, James D.
Anderson, Vanessa Siddle Walker, and Christopher M. Span’s respective publications on segregated schooling in the South.12 It is more clearly indicative to this exploration and seeks to interpret, how the voice and activism of Dallas’ African American community cultivated, strengthened, and grew—educationally and politically—in a society determined to make sure it did not?
This study seeks to “fill” the gaps of Dallas history, especially its African American communal record, as previously expressed by the historian Harvey J. Graff. While it may not complete the narration, this study hopes to offer a better understanding of the beliefs, responses, and ideals of Dallas’ African American community.
12 Henry Allen Bullock, A History of Negro Education in the South: From 1619 to the Present (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1970); James D. Anderson, The Education of Blacks in the South, 1860-1935 (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1988); Vanessa Walker, Their Highest Potential; Christopher Span, "Citizen or Laborer?." 18
CHAPTER 2
HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF DALLAS, 1900-1950
The city of Dallas, Texas was established in 1841 by John Neely Bryan.13 Dallas, as described by city planning commissioners, was settled in “the humid region of the ‘Blackland
Prairies’ of [North] Eastern Texas . . . .”14 Historian Robert B. Fairbanks enunciated that Dallas was established immediately north of the Trinity River because of the foreseen potential for trading along the stream. In addition to this, large amounts of oil were discovered in all directions surrounding the city.15 The potential for trading became a reality with Dallas indeed attracting a host of businessmen, as expressed by historian Jodi Skipper.16 Because of its invaluable goods, Dallas evolved from a once small enclave to a man-made metropolis at a very swift pace.17 The purpose of this chapter is to situate the state of Texas’ population growth in the overall demographic narrative of the City of Dallas. Most importantly however, this chapter seeks to highlight race relations between African American and White Dallasites as it relates to the organizational makeup and development of the Dallas Independent School District.
Consequently, a recounting of public school experiences by African American Dallasites prior to
1950 is also detailed in this chapter.
Demographics of the State of Texas and the City of Dallas
13 Jackie McElhaney and Michael V. Hazel, "Dallas, TX," Handbook of Texas Online (http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/hdd01), accessed 4 January 2015. Uploaded on 12 June 2010. Published by the Texas State Historical Association.
14 Harold Star, Your Dallas of Tomorrow: A Master Plan for a Greater Dallas- Report Number One: Character of the City. St. Louis: Harland Bartholomew and Associates, 1943, 8.
15 C. A. Warner, Texas Oil & Gas Since 1543 (Ingleside: Copano Bay Press, 2007).
16 Jodi Skipper, “’In the neighborhood’: City Planning, Archeology, and Cultural Heritage Politics at St. Paul United Methodist Church, Dallas, Texas” (PhD diss., The University of Texas at Austin, 2010).
17 Harland Bartholomew and Associates, Your Dallas of Tomorrow: A Master Plan for a Greater Dallas- Report Number One: Character of the City. St. Louis: Harland Bartholomew and Associates, 1943. 19
According to the 1900 United States census, the population of Texas was 3,048,710.18
While the state has historically enjoyed a large populace, a significant racial imbalance existed with roughly 79.6 percent of Texas residents listed as “White” while the remaining 20.4 percent listed as “Colored,” which could include African Americans, Mexican Americans, Asian
Americans, and Native Americans.19 Dallas demographics mirrored that of the state. In 1900, the city was comprised of 42,639 Dallasites, approximately 78.7 percent being White and 21.2 percent being “Colored”.20 Overtime, as the overall populations of Texas and Dallas increased, its racial composition and percentages remain virtually the same.
For example, the 1910 United States census revealed that both the State of Texas and the
City of Dallas populations had both grown exponentially. Nonetheless, both state-level and city- level population characteristics remained mostly White. To be exact, the 1910 census documented 3,896,542 Texas residents.21 Of those accounted for, a staggering 82.25 percent of
Texas residents were White while a mere 17.7 percent were “Colored”.22 Dallas also continued to experience rapid growth because of its vast resources. By 1910, the city more than doubled its population from 42,639 to 92,104. Roughly 80.4 percent were White.
18 United States Census Office, Census Reports Volume I: Twelfth Census of the United States, Taken in the Year 1900- Population Part I (Washington: Department of the Interior, 1901).
19 Ibid. While Texas was historically comprised of mostly White people, the state also boasted a significant Mexican American populace as well. However, Hispanic Texans were historically classified as “other Whites” for more than a century. With that, Hispanic Texans were formally accounted for within the White population, with no racial differences being reflected in census data. To be clear, for census recordings Hispanic Texans were counted as “White.” It was not until the 1970s that this changed.
20 Ibid.; Texas Almanac, “Texas Almanac: City Population History from 1850-2000” http://www.texasalmanac.com/sites/default/files/images/CityPopHist%20web.pdf (accessed 9 March 2015).
21 Campbell Gibson and Kay Jung, “Population Division: Historical Census Statistics on Population Totals by Race, 1790 to 1990, and by Hispanic Origin, 1970 to 1990, for the United States, Regions, Divisions, and States” (U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, 2002).
22 Texas Almanac, “Texas Almanac: City Population History from 1850-2000.” 20
Such drastic differences in racial representation highly affected the organizational structure and quality of public schooling offered in the city. Texas, like every other southern state, developed a system of dual education for its White and “Colored” residents. During the
1910-1911 academic years, 75.0 percent of White Dallasites that were of school age attended a public school.23 On the other hand, only 2,511 African American school-aged Dallas children attended school during the same academic years.24 The Thirteenth Biennial Report of Dallas
Public Schools acknowledged that “Colored” schools were scarce, physically small, and fiscally unequal to White schools.25
As racial discrimination, oppression, and segregation continued to exist, business and economic success were largely responsible for the steady population growth of Texas, namely the City of Dallas. In 1920, for instance, the State of Texas had a total population of 4,663,228 while the city of Dallas proper contained 210,551 residents.26 Ten years later, the State of Texas grew to 5,824,715, while Dallas increased by nearly 50,000 to 260,475.27 By 1940, the population of Texas increased by another million and Dallas by another 30,000. Specifically, the
United States Department of Commerce cited that Texas had a total population of 6,414,824 individuals. Included in the State of Texas’ total population was the City of Dallas which had a
23 Seventeenth Biennial Report of the State Department of Education for the Years Ending August 31, 1909, and August 31, 1910 (Austin: Austin Printing Co., 1911), 410.
24 Ibid.
25 Thirteenth Biennial Report of the Dallas Public Schools (Published by Authority: Dallas, 1910).
26 Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census, Fourteenth Census of the United States Taken in the Year 1920: Volume III Population- Composition and Characteristics of the Population by States (Department of Commerce, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1922).
27 US Department of Commerce, Fifteenth Census of the United States: 1930- Population Volume II, Part 2 Montana-Wyoming (Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1932). 21
1940 total population of 294,734.28 Although the city continued to experience a population boom, it also remained largely White, physically segregated, and racially isolating.
Despite the population growth Dallas remained 82.9 percent White Dallasites and 17.1 percent “Negro” or African American.29 Much like its city racial landscape, the dually-operated
Dallas Independent School District also remained incredibly disproportionate. For example, of the 48,099 school-aged children attending public school within the Dallas Independent School
District, a staggering 39,842 of the children were White.30 The remaining 8,257 students were
African American.31 These trends continued to take place into the 1950s.
By the mid-twentieth century, the State of Texas boasted a total populace of 7,711,194 residents.32 While the population continued to grow, the State of Texas remained majority White.
According to the Seventeenth Decennial of the United States, 87.2 percent of all Texas inhabitants were White.33 In relation to this statistic, only 12.7 percent of all Texans were
African American.34 Just as the majority of Texans remained White, so too did most Dallasites.
28 US Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census, Sixteenth Census of the United States: 1940 Population Volume IV- Characteristics by Age Marital Status, Relationship, Education, and Citizenship Part IV: Ohio-Wyoming (United States Department of Commerce, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1943), 795.
29 Ibid.
30 Ibid.
31 Ibid.
32 U.S. Census Bureau, Historical Census Statistics on Population Totals by Race, 1790-1990, and by Hispanic Origin, 1970-1990, for the U.S., Regions, Divisions, and States, Texas- Race and Hispanic Origin Table no.058, Record Number: 2002 ASI 2626-13.57 http://statistical.proquest.com.proxy2.library.illinois.edu/statisticalinsight/result/pqpresultpage.previewtitle?docType =PQSI-TABLE&titleUri=%2Ftable%2F2002%2F2626-13-57%2FTBL58.xml (accessed 9 March 2015).
33 US Department of Commerce, A Report of the Seventeenth Decennial Census of the United States- Census of Population: 1950 Volume II, Characteristics of the Population Number of Inhabitants, General and Detailed Characteristics of the Population (Washington: United States Government Printing Office: 1952).
34 Ibid. 22
Specifically, in 1950 the City of Dallas was made up of 434,462 people.35 Of those living within the city proper, 81.6 percent of Dallasites was White.36 Contrasting this, an estimated 18.4 percent of Dallasites were “Nonwhite” or African American.37 Further, the racial makeup of the
Dallas Independent School District resembled that of the city’s populace.
According to Howard G. Brunsman and fellow United States census statisticians, there were an estimated 126,210 children of school-age residing within the City of Dallas.38 However, many students did not attend school. In 1950 it was found that of the 89,545 school-aged children who attended public school within the Dallas Independent School District, the majority of students attending were White.39 Of those who attended school, 58,240 students were White while only 7,685 students aged six to twenty were African American. This measurable difference between those who attended school and those who did not also mirrored the organizational structure of the Dallas Independent School District and its quality of schooling experience, for
African American Dallasites.
Organizational Structure of the Dallas Independent School District, prior to 1950
35 Ibid.
36 Ibid.
37 Ibid. It is important to note that the term “Nonwhite” was used in the 1950 census. This term replaced the label “Colored” and “Negro” which had been used in previous censuses. However, while African Americans were categorized as “Nonwhite,” this term was also used to label immigrant Dallasites of Asian background. Specifically, Japanese Americans, Chinese Americans, and Southeast Asian Indian Americans were also accounted for within the “Nonwhite” population. As previously mentioned, Mexican Americans and other Hispanic Texans were classified as White for census and racial identifying purposes until the 1970s.
38 Howard G. Brunsman, A Report of the Seventeenth Decennial Census of the United States Census of Population: 1950 Volume II Characteristics of the Population Number of Inhabitants, General and detailed Characteristics of the Population- Part 43 Texas (U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1952), 207.
39 Ibid. 23
Prior to 1950, the Dallas Independent School District was a dually-operated public schooling system. Operating under the umbrella of the Dallas Independent School District
(DISD) were two educational systems. One system was a Dallas Independent School District for
White students, only. In this schooling system only White school-aged Dallasites were eligible to attend neighborhood schools that were built to serve only White students. These schools often had “Whites Only” signs, or were well known by community members to have been White only schools. In addition to these schools being entirely for White students, teachers, staff members, and administrators at the schools were also of the White race. African American employees, especially teachers and administrators, were not allowed in Dallas’ White public schools.
On the other hand, the Dallas Independent School District also operated a schooling system for the education of African American children of school age. African American schools within Dallas’ public schooling system were, thus, classified as Dallas Independent School
District schools as well. Although there was a significantly smaller number of schools offered to
African American Dallasites, these “Colored Only” or “Negro Only” schools were incredibly inequitable. In the African American organizational structure of the Dallas Independent School
District, only African American school-aged Dallasites were eligible to the attend schools that were established to serve only African American students. There was a significant lack of neighborhood schools for which African American children could attend. As late as the 1950s, fewer African American students attended high school in Dallas than White Dallasites. This, was largely because there were but a few African American high schools in the city, while contrastingly there were several for White students.40 Oftentimes, African American students had to travel far distances outside of their neighborhood in order to receive a formal education. Even
40 Ibid. 24 so, countless African American students were taught their school lessons in grossly inadequate and unkempt spaces. These inadequacies greatly affected the schooling experience for African
American Dallasites, and other African American Texans, prior to the mid-1950s.
African American Schooling Experiences Prior to Brown
In early twentieth century America, Texas state-supported high schools for African
American instruction were so scarce that African American city dwellers were usually the only subpopulation to benefit from their existence. The historian Deborah Morowski made clear that, in Texas, high schools for “Colored youth” were primarily situated in cities, and even then there were not many.41 This was true of Dallas public schools. In addition to the scarcity of high schools offered to African Americans in whole or in part, it was the farcical explanation utilized by state-level civic and educational leaders when justifying the inadequacy of funding and educational opportunity appropriated to African Americans that strengthened underlying racism through the use of economic power.
Noted by the historian Henry Allen Bullock, the presumption that African Americans had a lower intellectual aptitude in contrast to White Americans led the Texas state governing body to believe that African Americans had a remediated learning ability. Further, Texas state legislators reasoned that schools for African Americans needed to be fiscally cheap because it corresponded to their simpleminded capacity to learn.42 Remembered by Lula Byars during a
1990s oral history interview, about her 1920s teaching experience, was the structural and operational inadequacy of the schools offered to African Americans. Byars stated that,
The building, it was just one big room, and it was very, very poorly equipped. Sometimes the windowpanes were out. The floors were not covered and there were splinters, big
41 Deborah Lynn Morowski, "Prevailing over Prejudice: A Story of Race, Inequity, and Education in Gonzales, Texas" (PhD diss., The University of Texas at Austin, 2008).
42 Henry A. Bullock, A History of Negro Education in the South: From 1619 to the Present. 25
splinters in the floors. And there was no paint. . . . It was a horrible looking sight, I’ll be honest. And there was no equipment. The only thing in there that you could use to work was a blackboard and a couple of erasers . . . you just had to devise your own equipment. And there was no water there. We had to carry water from across [at] some of the neighbors’ places. They had a few textbooks they had brought us from the other [all- Anglo] school. They would give the other school the new books and give us the old, raggedy, nasty, dirty tore-up books!43
Recollections like Ms. Byars offers a personal and intimate account that is twofold. On the one hand, Byars’ narrative provides an image of what it must have been like to teach in a “Negro only” school in Dallas, with meager support. On the other hand, the detailed recollection by Ms.
Byars also draws attention to the gravely inadequate quality of resources that were ever-present in segregated and inferior learning environments. African American children throughout Dallas were forced to use outdated books and other substandard materials in the hope of being educated.
Nonetheless, it was their commitment and dedication to receive an education that persisted in the hearts and souls of Dallas’ African American populace. Just as the historian Christopher M. Span summated,
To freedpeople [and the descendants of slaves], education was perceived as a means to progress and societal uplift; it was seen as an investment, an insurance of a better day for themselves and their children. It was considered a priority, a necessary expenditure for citizenship and the advancement of the race.44
It would be this fighting spirit that would propel equal educational opportunity forward in
Dallas. Complementary to this, in considering the quality of public schooling offered to African
American Dallasites following the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision, several community members would make their perspectives known.
As [Dallas] entered the twentieth century, the [city’s] African Americans were, by most measures, more prosperous and secure in their rights than at any time in
43 William H. Kellar, Make Haste Slowly: Moderates, Conservatives, and School Desegregation in Houston; Larry Willoughby, Texas, Our Texas (Orlando: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1993), 8.
44 Span, From Cotton Field to Schoolhouse: African American Education in Mississippi, 1862-1875 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2009), 45. 26
their history. By no means had prejudice, discrimination, and racial violence disappeared, and African Americans continued to lag behind the White majority in most social and economic measures. Even so, the twentieth century had witnessed a radical change in the role and the status of African Americans in the Lone Star State, though falling short perhaps of expectations. African Americans in [Dallas], across Texas, and throughout the nation had greeted the arrival of the twentieth century with great hope. . . . Unfortunately, the reality of race relations at the dawn of the century did not justify such hope. . . . The new century also brought renewed efforts to impose segregation on most aspects of public and private life, while political ‘reforms’ denied [African Americans] any meaningful political power. For African Americans in [Dallas], the [mid] twentieth century would be the era of their struggle for dignity against racism, oppression, and Jim Crow.45
By the mid-1950s, African American Dallasites began to actively journey toward justice and equality. As they were met with White opposition, African American Dallasites made their concerns known. In both social and educational settings, they demanded unconditional treatment throughout the city. Most significantly, they began making a conscious effort by demanding that businesses and educational establishments, like the Dallas Independent School District, upheld the standards of both fairness and equality.
45 Cary D. Wintz, "The Struggle for Dignity: African Americans in Twentieth Century Texas," in Twentieth-Century Texas: A Social and Cultural History, ed. John Woodrow Storey and Mary L. Kelley (Denton: University of North Texas Press, 2008), 69-70. 27
CHAPTER 3
BROWN v. BOARD OF EDUCATION AND THE DALLAS RESPONSE, 1950s-1960s
From the many accounts described by Pulitzer Prize award-winning journalist Richard
Kluger, in the definitive work Simple Justice: The History of Brown v. Board of Education and
Black America’s Struggle for Equality, Monday, May 17, 1954 proved to begin as a routinely- quiet and uneventful morning at the Supreme Court of the United States.46 Noted by Kluger, “All of the opinions of the Court were announced on Mondays in that era. . . . The routine was generally so cut-and-dried that most veteran newsmen covering the Court did not bother going upstairs to hear the opinions being read by the Justices in none too sonorous voices.”47 Yet, this day was one unlike any other. This special Monday was the day that the nation was thrust upon the center stage of our global community. Therefore, May 17, 1954, is the day that is etched in history as the day legalized segregation in America was declared unconstitutional.
Brown was enlightening on multiple accords. First and foremost, “the separate but equal” doctrine as determined in the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision was overruled. Secondly and most importantly, this ruling brought about the forced transformation of a society. No longer advocating for racial apartheid, the Warren Court instead addressed the ever-changing dynamics of a democratic society and with such reasoning escorted in a new era in its place. An example of the change that occurred in response to Brown is the evolution of the City of Dallas.
Following the Brown v. Board of Education decision, Dallasites rallied both in support of and in opposition to this decision. This chapter details the activism and determination of African
American Dallasites in the fight for social and schooling equality. Juxtaposed to this, the
46 Richard Kluger, Simple Justice: The History of Brown v. Board of Education and Black America's Struggle for Equality, 2nd ed. (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2004).
47 Ibid., 703. 28 opposition and calculated compromise of White Dallasites to social and schooling equality is also highlighted.
Historical Account of Brown v. Board of Education
According to the historian Taylor Branch,
News hunger on the matter was so intense that the Associated Press issued a flash bulletin at 12:52 P.M. noting simply that Warren was issuing the opinion, another at 1:12 P.M. saying that he ‘had not read far enough into the court’s opinion’ for reporters to discern its conclusion, and a final bulletin at 1:20 declaring that the Court had struck down school segregation as unconstitutional by a vote of 8-0.48
When recounting the mental and emotional affects segregated institutions had on students of color, Chief Justice Warren sternly addressed the world in his deliverance of the 1954 opinion by stating that,
In approaching this problem, we cannot turn back the clock to 1868, when the [Fourteenth] Amendment was adopted, or even to 1896, when Plessy v. Ferguson was written. We must consider public education in the light of its full development and its present place in American life throughout the Nation. Only in this way can it be determined if segregation in public schools deprives these plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws. Today, education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments. . . . It is required in the performance of our most basic public responsibilities, even service in the armed forces. It is the very foundation of good citizenship. Today it is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment. In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms. We come then to the question presented: Does segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities? We believe that it does [emphasis added].49
48 Taylor Branch, Parting the Waters: America in the King Years 1954-63 (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1988), 112.
49 Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Opinion; 17 May 1954; Records of the Supreme Court of the United States; Record Group 267; National Archives. 29
Brown singlehandedly began the legal transformation of society by deeming, “separate but equal
[accommodations as] . . . inherently unconstitutional.”50 With such a simplistic enunciation, change was on the horizon. The era of equality, equity, fairness, access, and opportunity initiatives for all children, was born as a result of the socially-charged and racially-demeaning evidence acknowledged.51
Thurgood Marshall, first chair legal counsel representing all named plaintiffs, strategically planned his method of argumentation. Marshall wanted to spark an inquiry into the validity of the legal precedent behind the separate but equal doctrine. He believed, alongside
Justice Warren, that “to continue to educate nonwhites in inadequate and inferior schools poses a
50 For comprehensive works see: Frank Brown, "The First Serious Implementation of Brown: The 1964 Civil Rights Act and Beyond," Journal of Negro Education 73, no. 3 (2004); James D. Anderson, "A Tale of Two 'Browns': Constitutional Equality and Unequal Education," Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education 105, no. 2 (2006); Derrick Bell, Silent Covenants: Brown v. Board of Education and the Unfulfilled Hopes for Racial Reform (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004); Paul Green, "The Paradox of the Promised Unfulfilled: Brown v. Board of Education and the Continued Pursuit of Excellence in Education," Journal of Negro Education 73, no. 3 (2004); George W. and Jason Mendez Noblit, "Legacies of Brown versus Board: An Introduction to the Special Issue," The Urban Review 40, no. 1 (2008); Jasmine D. Parker, "From Slavery to Equal Protection: The Misinterpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment and Its Lasting Effects on American Society" (master's thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2010).
51 While many historians agree that the Civil Rights Movement entered full-swing at the on-set of the Brown decision, widely debated among researchers is the actual genesis of the Movement itself. Rather than finding its birth in the 1950s, many historians believe that the Civil Rights Movement began during the 1940s, specifically during the years of World War II. As African American soldiers fought against fascism abroad in the service of their country and in the name of freedom everywhere, thousands of African Americans were unsettled by their lack of judicial power and their assumed, lowly, place in the national order of society. “Home of the brave, land of the free” was but an ideal for African Americans until well into the twentieth century. Fighting on behalf of true democracy everywhere, African American soldiers coined the “Double V Campaign,” which was symbolic of victory abroad and victory at home. The sociopolitical platform of these soldiers included demanding that the federal government desegregate its military battalions, promote experienced and satisfactory African American personnel, as well as to grant impartial suffrage rights to African Americans, free of discrimination. For additional readings on the impact African American World War II soldiers had on the Civil Rights Movement, please see also: Beth Bailey and David Farber, "The DoubleV" Campaign in World War II Hawaii: African Americans, Racial Ideology, and Federal Power," Journal of Social History 26, no. 4 (1993); Steven Tozer, Paul C. Violas, and Guy B. Senese, School and Society: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006); Manning Marable and Leith Mullings, Let Nobody Turn Us Around: Voices of Resistance, Reform, and Renewal (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003); Michael J. Klarman, "Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement," Virginia Law Review 80, no. 7 (1994). 30 clear and present danger not just to minorities but to the future of entire communities.”52 To reach this goal Marshall solicited social scientists for assessment, financial statistics, and equity audits. Most importantly, he requested firsthand accounts regarding how African American children felt about themselves, their community, and their learning environment also be included as evidence.53 Of those to speak about how being African American affected them, both educationally and socially, was Linda Brown.54
At the time of the cases filing, then seven-year-old Linda Brown was a third grader attending public school in her native home of Topeka, Kansas. Young Linda Brown lived in a racially mixed neighborhood with her family. However, she was forced to attend an all-African
American school that was a further distance from her home as opposed to the nearby all-White neighborhood school. Although the school district supplied bus transportation for students of color, the journey was in and of itself discriminatory. This was because most White children did not travel great distances to attend school. Understanding the grave difference of treatment between children of difference races, Oliver Brown, Linda’s father, filed a lawsuit on his daughters’ behalf. Thus, Linda Brown famously became known as the oldest named plaintiff in the case to dismantle public school segregation, as segregationist practices had been imposed under the separate but equal doctrine.
52 Herbert Hill and James E. Jones, Race in America: The Struggle for Equality (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1993), 260.
53 Kenneth B. Clark and Mamie K. Clark, "The Development of Consciousness of Self and the Emergence of Racial Identification in Negro Preschool Children," The Journal of Social Psychology 10, no. 4 (1939). See also Kenneth B. Clark and Mamie P. Clark, "Emotional Factors in Racial Identification and Preference in Negro Children," Journal of Negro Education summer (1950).
54 For additional information on the schooling experience of Linda Brown, please see also: James T. Patterson and William W. Freehling, Brown v. Board of Education: A Civil Rights Milestone and Its Troubled Legacy (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001); Charles J. Ogletree, All Deliberate Speed: Reflections on the First Half Century of Brown v. Board of Education (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2004); Thomas Pettigrew, "The Cold Structural Inducements to Integration," The Urban Review 8, no. 2 (1975). 31
Following the 1896 Plessy decision every public facility in the United States converted to segregated and dually-operated spaces. Because state governments were largely responsible for appropriating the fiscal monies needed to teach students, segregated institutions were supposed to have equal supplies, though many did not. In addition to this, teachers were due equal salaries, yet this also did not occur. As previously detailed, there were many obvious instances of financial discrimination in African Americans schools. “Negro schools,” as they were labeled from the 1930s to 1950s, often times received a meager amount of finances to successfully run their schools. In contrast, Whites were generously given the majority of budgets for the education of their school-aged children.
For example, according to critical race theorist Derrick Bell, “[the state of] Georgia in
1926 had an average per-pupil expenditure of $36.29 for Whites and $4.59 for ‘Blacks,’ and average teachers’ salaries of $97.88 per month for Whites and $49.41 for ‘Blacks.’”55 In an effort to legally strategize ways to obtain educational opportunity for African American students and teachers, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) created its educational litigation branch in 1940, the Legal Defense and Education Fund, Incorporated
(LDEF). Following its establishment, LDEF enacted several initiatives for the equalization of the public schooling experience. Among the initiatives included equalized teacher pay, new school books, more school buses, and a host of other resources. By employing statistics found in the aforementioned studies, alongside other forms of racial analyses, Marshall was able to “get the
Court to hear four school desegregation cases, which it consolidated [as] Brown v. Board of
Education.”56 Like Thurgood Marshall, Chief Justice Earl Warren believed that it was pertinent
55 Bell, Silent Covenants, 15.
56 Ibid., 16. 32 for Brown to be heard by the Supreme Court because “public education had to be considered in the light of its whole development and its present place in American life throughout the nation.”57
In the plaintiffs’ defense, Marshall argued that segregation was unequal and therefore violated the Fourteenth Amendment rights of African American students specifically their equal protection of the laws. Expert witnesses testified that separating students according to their skin pigmentation was not only racist but the basic action was also detrimental to one’s academic and social well-being. The plaintiffs further argued that segregation harmed the children. Many of those who testified reasoned that segregated schooling provided students with several negative outlooks on how they viewed themselves, their culture, and society around them. To further this point, President Harry S. Truman’s Solicitor General released a timely statement by acknowledging that, “segregation has a detrimental effect on ‘Colored’ children… that it affects their motivation to learn… and it has a tendency to retard their educational and mental development and to deprive them of benefits they would receive in an integrated school system.58 Consequently, Thurgood Marshall set out to prove to the Court that segregation and
Jim Crow separatist laws were never created to equalize the races. Marshall argued that segregated conditions scrutinized and further demeaned African Americans. Such treatment put
African Americans in subservient positions which thereby prevented them from achieving any measureable form of success.
To African Americans, segregation removed any chance of ever being seen as an equal alongside their White counterparts. Segregation left a conscious reminder in the minds of African
57 Ibid, 17.
58 Green, "The Paradox of the Promised Unfulfilled," 272. 33
Americans that they held no value in society and that they were not worthy enough to live in an integrated setting with their White brethren. Further, when assessing the ways in which segregated institutions also affected White school-aged children, it is imperative to recall a viewpoint held by many White children. Recalled by Richard Kluger was that,
The effects of segregation were by no means limited to the ‘Black’ children that the clinic examined. [Researcher Fredic Wertham emphasized that], among [some] White children, he found, segregation tended to confirm or sanction some of the worst prejudices absorbed from other sources in the community. One White child told Wertham’s group that some of the youngsters in her class said they wanted to tie up ‘Colored’ children with their hands behind their backs and make them work—a not very practical arrangement. ‘The boys say that they [the ‘Colored’ children] should work and we [White children] should pay,” she said.59
These forms of overt discrimination and classism are defined by Joe Feagin as White racism.
Feagin explained, White racism “can be viewed as the socially organized set of practices, attitudes, and ideas that deny African Americans and other people of color the privileges, dignity, opportunities, freedoms, and rewards that this nation offers to White Americans.”60 To prove this point, Thurgood Marshall enlisted a social scientist to conduct psychological evaluations on children. This innovative technique is what greatly assisted in reversing the 1896
Plessy decision.
Social scientists Kenneth Clark and Gunnar Myrdal both heavily evaluated the social, psychological, and educative capacity of African American children. Because of their efforts and skill sets, both Clark and Myrdal became expert witnesses in the Brown case.61 The scientists employed the “Doll Test” by asking the children simple questions like, Which doll is pretty?
59 Kluger, Simple Justice, 444.
60 Joe R. Feagin, Hernan Vera, and Pinar Batur White Racism: The Basics (New York: Routledge, 2001), 17.
61 Gunnar Myrdal, An American Dilemma, Volume 2: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy, (Livingston: Transaction Publishers, 1944). 34
Which doll is ugly? Which doll is good? Which doll is bad?62 Following each question, the children were asked to point to the doll that corresponded with the characteristics provided in each question. Almost overwhelmingly, when asked which dolls were mean, stupid, ugly, and likely to become criminals, the children pointed to the African American dolls.63 Contrastingly, when asked which dolls were beautiful, had nice hair, were smart, and most likely to succeed in life, the children unanimously agreed that the White doll possessed those positive attributes.64
What was shocking, however, was when the social scientists asked the children to identify the doll that looked most like them. Regardless of their internalized feelings surrounding society’s perception and lack of value for people of color, all of the African American children pointed to the African American doll. Consequently, such myths negatively contributed to how African
American children viewed not only their ethnic group, but also themselves and their place in society. This devastatingly proved to the Court that the children were well aware of the negative stereotypes surrounding the African American race. It was therefore illustrated that “…because of the psychological harm caused by compulsory segregation, the ‘Black’ children received an inferior educational opportunity as compared with that received by White children.”65
62 Kenneth Bancroft Clark and Mamie P Clark, Racial Identification and Preference in Negro Children (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1918). In what began as her thesis, Dr. Mamie Clark crafted the line draw test to evaluate and analyze how “Negro” students perceived themselves, in a post slavery-America, as well as how outward societal perception affected the cognitive abilities of children. This study overtime evolved to become the infamous “doll test” that was employed by her husband and fellow social scientist, Dr. Kenneth B. Clark, whose research was also deeply rooted in identity, perception, and ability.
63 Peter H. Irons, Jim Crow’s Children: The Broken Promise of the Brown Decision (New York: The Penguin Group, 2002), 62-79.
64 Ibid.
65 James E. Bruno, Emerging Issues in Education: Policy Implications for the Schools (Lanham: Lexington Books, 1972), 48.
35
While the Court cast down legalized public school segregation by means of the Brown ruling of 1954, it “reject[ed] the NAACP’s requests that desegregation be ordered immediately. .
. . The Court [instead] opted for a procedure that would permit each lower court to resolve for itself the administrative and academic problems presented for compliance.”66 However painstaking, the Supreme Court never specified a date as for when school districts were to desegregate their schools. There are several opinions as to why the Supreme Court decided the chosen, delayed, implementation strategy. One such belief held by both journalists and historians was the sheer amount of societal uncertainty.67 The enforcement delay of the Supreme Court in
Brown directly led many states to ignore the Courts original ruling. Simultaneously, several states began pledging alliance to the power and supremacy of states’ rights.68 These states, mostly members of the old Confederate in the Deep South, actively vowed to maintain segregated facilities, state authority, and White power.69
Resulting from this, the Court reviewed the effect segregation had on public schooling one year later only to find that over ninety-nine percent of the country was still operating under segregation sanctions. Therefore the Court reissued a ruling in Brown, widely denoted as Brown
II, regarding implementation measures and protocol procedures. In this ruling, the United States
66 Derrick Bell, Silent Covenants: Brown V. Board of Education and the Unfulfilled Hopes for Racial Reform, 18.
67 For additional literature on the Supreme Court’s unsettled belief as for whether people supported or opposed desegregation please also see: Herbert Garfinkel, "Social Science Evidence and the School Segregation Cases," The Journal of Politics 21, no. 1 (1959); David G. Barnum, "The Supreme Court and Public Opinion: Judicial Decision Making in the Post-New Deal Period,"; Richard Kluger, Simple Justice: The History of Brown v. Board of Education and Black America's Struggle for Equality.
68 George W. Noblit, "Legacies of Brown versus Board: An Introduction to the Special Issue."
69 Strom Thurmond, "The 'Southern Manifesto'," Congressional Record 102 (1956).
36
Supreme Court called for public school districts to desegregate their institutions with all deliberate speed.70 However, critical race theorist and legal pioneer Derrick Bell asserted that the delay in desegregation and the Brown II follow-up was required “…not only to permit time for the major changes required in Southern school policies, but also…to enable accommodation to school integration which ran counter to the views and strong emotions of most Southern
Whites.”71
As will be detailed, Dallasites both African American and White felt an array of emotions about the mandated measure. For example, White legislative leaders, governing officials, and commonplace civic community members throughout Dallas vigorously rejected the high court’s ruling as it related to desegregation. To that end, the Dallas Independent School District did not begin to desegregate for a minimum of ten years post-Brown.72 While unique in its geographic location, the journey toward achieving desegregation in Dallas was like other southern cities. It was an extensively-long process. Due in large part to varying political beliefs, judicial oversight and lackadaisical implementation concerning desegregation, it would take the Dallas
Independent School District well over forty years to successfully desegregate its schools.73 Even then, several people remained apprehensive about the quality of desegregation that occurred.
70 Brian J. Daugherity and Charles C. Bolton, With All Deliberate Speed: Implementing Brown v. Board of Education (Fayetteville: The University of Arkansas Press, 2008).
71 Bell, Faces at the Bottom of the Well, 50.
72 Harvey J. Graff, The Dallas Myth: The Making and Unmaking of an American City (Madison: University of Minnesota Press, 2008).
73 While the journey to desegregate the Dallas Independent School District initially began shortly after the Brown II holding, the school district was not granted unitary status until 1994. What is more, the school district remained under the custody of the United States Fifth Circuit Court until 2003. In that year, Judge Harold Barefoot Sanders, Jr. granted Dallas Independent School District’s motion to dismiss, stating that, “the segregation prohibited by the United States Constitution, the United States Supreme Court and the federal statutes no longer exist[ed] in DISD.” For additional information, see: Glenn M. Linden, Desegregating Schools in Dallas: Four Decades in the Federal Courts (Dallas: Three Forks Press, 1995). 37
Thus, prior to grappling with the effect the Brown v. Board of Education ruling had on the Dallas Independent School District, it is imperative to first examine the grave impact the ruling had on the social activism efforts of African American Dallasites. Complementary to this, the opposition and eventual compromise of White Dallasites to civic and schooling equality is also captured.
African American Dallasites Respond to Brown
Local social activists including Juanita Craft, A. Maceo Smith, Reverend E.C. Estell, and
Reverend Rhett James, in addition to the work of progressive grassroots organizations like the
Youth Council of the NAACP, the Dallas Negro Chamber of Commerce, and the Progressive
Voters League, all played significant roles in the development and progression of the Civil
Rights Movement in Dallas, Texas.74 Largely regarded as a pristine city with a notably-clean record of social conflict, the city of Dallas was in fact not immune to racial tension and
74 While deserving a historiography of its own, the work of African American founded progressive organizations in Dallas was monumental to the success of not only the Civil Rights Movement and the city as a whole, but also to the social betterment of the nation. For instance, founded in 1926, the Dallas Negro Chamber of Commerce (now the Dallas Black Chamber of Commerce) was the first organization of its kind in the State of Texas and throughout much of America. Additionally, the Dallas chapter of the NAACP, chartered in 1918, played a pivotal financial and activist role in the higher education desegregation case of Sweatt v. Painter (1950). Further, expanding upon a week-long series symposia hosted by members of the Dallas graduate chapter of Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Incorporated, was an effort to call attention to the importance of paying poll taxes. This event was orchestrated in order to maximize the voting potential of African Americans. This and other grassroots efforts subsequently encouraged the establishment of the state’s largest and most vocal African American political organization, the Progressive Voters League (PVL). Founded in 1936, the PVL heavily assisted the NAACP in the elimination of Texas’ all-White Democratic Primary in Smith v. Allwright (1944). In fact, the Progressive Voters League united African American voters in record numbers, thereby controlling the political outcome of elections for half a century. For additional reading on the histories and influence of these organizations, please see also: Alwyn Barr, Black Texans: A History of African Americans in Texas, 1528-1995 (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1996). W. Marvin Dulaney, "The Progressive Voters League: A Political Voice for African Americans in Dallas," Legacies: A History Journal for Dallas and North Central Texas 3, no. Spring (1991); Darlene Clark Hine, Steven F. Lawson, and Merline Pitre, Black Victory: The Rise and Fall of the White Primary in Texas (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2003); Donald S. Strong, "The Rise of Negro Voting in Texas," The American Political Science Review 42, no. 3 (1948); Brian D. Behnken, "The" Dallas Way": Protest, Response, and the Civil Rights Experience in Big D and Beyond," Southwestern Historical Quarterly 111, no. 1 (2007b); Michael L. Gillette, "The Rise of the NAACP in Texas," (1978). 38 community conflict.75 Acts of blatant discrimination penetrated an overwhelming sense of injustice in the hearts and minds of several African American Dallasites. Although such events were often times unpublicized and left out of local newspapers, thus subsequently failing to leave behind any visible vestiges of social turmoil and unrest, these experiences undeniably led to demonstrations, protests, rallies, and marches. Countless African American Dallasites participated in the city’s Civil Rights Movement. To better substantiate the journey and demand of the Civil Rights Movement in Dallas, as well as how those efforts influenced the nonviolent school rights movement for the Dallas Independent School District, it is imperative to first assess some of the issues that plagued African American city dwellers. Such issues gave rise to the
Dallas African American community and their quest for justice, civic, and social equality. The outcome of their unsung courage, conviction, and fierce determination resulted in a conscious effort to bring about a more equal and desegregated city, and unitary Dallas Independent School
District.
When assessing the extent to which discrimination was exercised in Dallas,
Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson recalled her experience dress shopping at a downtown
75 Prior to becoming temporarily labeled the “city of hate” following the assassination of President John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963 in Dallas, Texas, civic leaders and business executives in the city formed an organization that was responsible for the City of Dallas’ marketing campaigns. Dallas was advertised as a business conglomerate and economic paradise for companies and affluent persons. As a result, the City of Dallas is the headquarters for countless companies. Specifically, the city proper is the home to twelve Fortune 500 companies. The Dallas- Fort Worth (DFW) Metroplex as a whole is home to twenty Fortune 500 companies. Thus, every year Dallas has one of the top grossing revenue bases in the United States. For general information on the City of Dallas, please see also: Robert V. Kemper, "Dallas-Fort Worth: Toward New Models of Urbanization, Community Transformation, and Immigration," Urban Anthropology and Studies of Cultural Systems and World Economic Development 34, no. 2-3 (2005).
39 department store in the 1950s.76 When interviewed by journalist Jim Schutze, Congresswoman
Johnson attested that,
I was going by train [to attend a wedding in South Bend, Indiana], and I wanted a small collapsible hat to put on my head . . . . My parents taught us that, even if you couldn’t buy much, you should buy the best, so I went to one of the best stores downtown, A. Harris. And I was told that I could not try on hats and shoes. They had to measure my head and then go over and measure the hat . . . . I had never experienced anything like that, even in Waco. But it was that way everywhere in Dallas. Volk Brothers wouldn’t even let you flip through their dresses on the rack. They escorted you to a dressing room and brought you whatever you wanted to see.77
The depths of apartheid and oppression were clear. Dallas, a then-evolving business oriented industrial city, denied African American Dallasites the opportunity to equally and comfortably engage as patrons in stores and franchises throughout the area. Such subjugation, in many regards, invalidated the personal freedoms and liberties of African American Dallasites. To further this point, journalist Jim Schutze added that, “African Americans who wanted to buy clothing in the stores downtown during the 1950s could not try anything on. [This was because]
76 Jim Schutze, The Accommodation: The Politics of Race in an American City, 86. Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson is a native Texan. Born and raised in segregated Waco, Texas, Johnson also recalled seeing ‘Colored’ and ‘White’ signs hanging all over Waco, but found racism in Dallas to be extremely overt and “very clear.” Originally elected to the Texas House of Representatives in 1972, Congresswoman Johnson later became the first woman in North Texas history, since the Reconstruction Era, to become a member of the Texas State Senate. This occurred in 1986. Prior to that, in 1977 Johnson was appointed by United States President Jimmy Carter to serve as Regional Director of then-named Department of Health, Welfare, and Education. Over time, this Department would be renamed the U.S. Department of Education. Johnson is founder and Co-chair of the Diversity and Innovation Caucus and of the United States House Historically Black Colleges and Universities Caucus (HHBCUC). She also actively maintains a host of other roles. Currently, Congresswoman Johnson is serving her eleventh term, representing the 30th Congressional District of Texas, which accounts for many suburban cities and towns within the southern region of Dallas County. For additional information on Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson, please see also: United States House of Representatives, "EBJ's Biography," United States Government, http://ebjohnson.house.gov/about/full-biography; Ruthe Winegarten, Black Texas Women: 150 Years of Trial and Triumph (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2010); Alwyn Barr, Black Texans: A History of African Americans in Texas, 1528-1995.
77 Jim Schutze, The Accommodation: The Politics of Race in an American City, 87.
40 nothing that had touched the skin of a ‘Black’ person could be sold to a White person. The message for ‘Black’ people was that White people [simply] wanted to be separate from them and found their skin [to be] dirty and loathsome.”78
Although disheartening, the work, zeal, and commitment of Dallas’ African American leadership persisted regardless of White opposition. African American Dallasites continuously demanded equality of treatment and justice in civil rights as it related to public spaces and businesses. Their efforts were pivotal to the success of the Civil Rights Movement, and school rights movement, in Dallas, Texas. For example, African American Dallasites both young and old united in support of desegregating movie theaters.
Historian Brian Behnken provided a chronological account of Dallas’ Civil Rights
Movement in his 2007 journal article The ‘Dallas Way’: Protest, Response, and the Civil Rights
Experience in Big D and Beyond. Behnken detailed that, “Direct action demonstrations began in
1955 when Juanita Craft’s ‘kids,’ teenagers from the Dallas Youth Council of the NAACP, decided to picket a movie theater.”79 Craft, who assumed the role of NAACP State Youth
Director in 1947, encouraged the African American youth of Dallas to organize by speaking out against racial discrimination head on.80 Consequently, several of Dallas’ youth NAACP chapter members, and their adult advisors, vehemently protested downtown’s Melba Theater.81 Picketers believed demonstrations would act as an attack on segregation. Yet, the outcomes of the movie
78 Ibid.
79 Behnken, "The 'Dallas Way'," 6.
80 To that end, Craft dramatically increased the membership base of the Dallas NAACP chapter, thereby making it one of the most active and progressive chapters in the state of Texas. For reading on the organization and progressive activism of the NAACP in Texas’ largest metropolitan areas including the cities of Dallas and Houston, please see: Gillette, "The Rise of the NAACP in Texas."
81 Behnken, "The 'Dallas Way'". 41
“stand-in” demonstrations were only mildly successful. To be plain, the managerial staff simply offered balcony seating to African American patrons. Prior to that, African Americans were completely shut out of the Melba Theater. Opposed to the idea of African Americans sitting with
White moviegoers, Melba staff denied lower-level seating access to African American cinema consumers. As a result of this token form of (de)segregation, the Melba Theater’s owners advertised the inauguration of African American balcony seating as “Negro Night”.82
Unsatisfied with such blatant disrespect and disregard for the unbiased practice of upholding civil liberty and justice, picketers continued their quest for equality of treatment.
Several activists in Dallas’ civil rights demonstrations hoped that their actions would force business owners to instate the complete desegregation of theaters, or face the possibility of being financially penalized by patrons whom would abstain from frequenting their business.
Consequently, demonstrations at movie theaters in Dallas continued into the early 1960s. While demonstrating at movie theaters and lunch counters in the downtown and North Dallas areas, youth council members were joined by politically liberal White undergraduate students who studied at nearby Southern Methodist University (SMU). In support of challenging segregated business practices, White students often brought their books and staged stand-ins at movie theaters and sit-ins at lunch counters.83 In fact, journalists Bill Minutaglio and Steven L. Davis documented the 1961 protest at downtown Dallas’ Palace and Majestic Theatres, respectively.
The journalists described the conglomeration of actions that took place by stating in part that,
82 Ibid. Additionally, I placed the conjugation for desegregated inside a parenthetical to highlight the ways in which segregation was advertised as its opposite, desegregation, although accommodations and spaces were anything but desegregated. To be clear, by advertising the theater as a now “desegregated” social space, the movie owners wished to circumvent protests and demonstrations at their business by seemingly cooperating with the demands of African American patrons. However, on its face, the theater remained segregated, with its staff taking great measures to maintain Dallas’ social caste in place.
83 Bill Minutaglio and Steven L. Davis, Dallas 1963. 42
“The students [would] stand quietly in line, waiting for their turn to purchase a ticket at the box office. They [would] ask for seats inside the theater—not in the segregated balcony [or to be able to sit inside with their ‘Negro’ friend]. When they [were] refused, they simply [would] walk back to the end of the line and start the entire process all over again.”84 Although these demonstrations were nonviolent and only moderately progressive, their actions were deliberate stances for the civil rights of all people, not just some of them. The demonstrations conducted by Dallas’
African American community thereby successfully garnered the attention of the Dallas Citizens
Council. Yet, social equality demonstrations at movie theaters were but one form of civic opposition the White business elite would have to face. Newsworthy boycotts at the State Fair of
Texas, and continued lunch counter sit-ins, began to increasingly garner the support of concerned
White Dallasites.
Concluded by the historian Brian Behnken,
While the [movie] theater refused to integrate . . . the youths next targeted the Texas State Fair, which was held annually on the fairgrounds in Dallas. African Americans could only enjoy the fair on one annual Negro Achievement Day; on all other days Jim Crow reigned. Because of this injustice, young ‘Blacks’ nonviolently picketed the fair in 1955.85
Journalist Jim Schutze provided further detail surrounding the extent to which segregation at the
State Fair was blatant. Schutze summated,
“Since the 1930s, ‘Blacks’ had been admitted to the fair on a special day set aside just for them . . . . Commonly and more or less openly called ‘Nigger Day’ by White people through the 1940s, the day was redubbed ‘Negro Achievement Day’ by fair officials in the early 1950s, fooling no one. Under increasing pressure [by progressive and socially involved African American Texans] to abolish ‘Nigger’
84 Ibid., 77.
85 Behnken, "The 'Dallas Way'," 7.
43
Day and completely desegregate, the fair finally opened its gates to ‘Blacks’ its entire run in 1953, but ‘Black’ people were still barred from the Midway and the restaurants. . . . [By 1955], ‘Black’ people complained to the Dallas Negro Chamber that the fair, which the Chamber claimed was desegregated, was still very much segregated. [Following the success of other civil rights protests, the Chamber had become a known ally of the Dallas Citizens Council, particularly their support of slow yet steady racial progress.] The Negro Chamber, in deference to this irrefutable truth, suddenly withdrew its support of the fair.”86
Following the withdrawal of support, the Dallas Negro Chamber of Commerce formally requested that the Midway be opened up to all State Fair attendees, without regard to race.
However Dallas leaders, namely the city’s Mayor, pivotal leader of the Dallas Citizens Council and State Fair of Texas board of directors member, Robert L. Thornton, adamantly refused the request. Protests persisted. In fact, this denial generated a unified protest at the entrance to the
Fair Park grounds in 1955, with chanters yelling “Stay Out! Don’t sell your pride for a segregated ride.”87 By the end of the 1955 fair season, youth protesters assembled the support of enough individuals and groups that protesters conducted picket lines at every gate entry to the fairgrounds.88 Their efforts were effective.
When noting the outcome of African American activism in Dallas throughout the 1950s and 1960s, Juanita Craft stated that, by 1957 the State Fair board of directors had removed the name “Negro” from Achievement Day advertisements.89 However, it was not until 1967 that the
State Fair of Texas unconditionally opened its doors, and all of its extraordinary attractions, to all persons regardless of race. Adding to that, Dallas activist Marion Butts noted that, as a result,
86 Jim Schutze, The Accommodation: The Politics of Race in an American City, 94-95.
87 Behnken, "The 'Dallas Way'".
88 Ibid., 7.
89 "Desegregating the State Fair of Texas: Marion Butts Collection." 44
African American community members were active participants in the 1967 opening day parade and every opening day parade thereafter.90 Evidentially, these small gains throughout the 1950s and 1960s were notable and commendable steps toward racial progress for the City of Dallas.
While demonstrations and acts of protest at the State Fair of Texas were carried out throughout the mid to late 1950s by young African Americans, the 1960s lunch counter sit-ins were conducted by socially liberal and politically aggressive adult members of the Dallas
Community Council. The African American led Dallas Community Council’s progressive stance on racial equality pushed the envelope of race-related social discourse plaguing the city. In many ways, their activism effectively forced the White conservative civic leadership of Dallas to adhere to the larger community’s demands for equality of treatment.
Following the advice of Juanita Craft, “the NAACP Youth Council targeted the H.L.
Green drugstore for an interracial sit-in in March of 1960. In April the sit-ins spread to the S.H.
Kress department store’s lunch counter. On April 25 the H.L. Green lunch counter served three
‘Black’ students from Southern Methodist University (SMU).”91 Also published by the Dallas
Express was the serving of ‘Black’ and White ministers at the S.H. Kress lunch counter just one day later.92 The actions of lunch counter operators to temporarily desegregate lunch counters led to an immediate celebration of victory by Dallas’ African American community. However, such celebrations for racial justice were prematurely held, because the lunch counters immediately
90 Ibid., 17.
91 Behnken, "The 'Dallas Way'", 11.
92 Author Unknown "Negro Clergyman Served at Downtown Lunch Counters," Dallas Express 30 April 1960. 45 returned to segregated facilities serving White patrons only. In addition to that, African
Americans were served at make shift counters created in basements, if served at all.93
Summated by William Brophy, “As was the case throughout the South, ‘Negroes’ in
Dallas resented merchants who accepted their money for goods purchased in their stores but who would not allow a ‘Black’ person to eat in the establishment’s restaurant [or to be an employee of their business].”94 Supporting this perspective, Reverend H. Rhett James explained to Dallas
Express reporters that, “H.L. Green and S.H. Kress integrate the ‘Negro’ customer’s money and segregate its facilities. . . . This policy of segregated lunch counters . . . is not compatible to the
American Way of Life. The time has come for Dallas ‘Negroes’ to unite together and refrain from buying from concerns who [sic] insult human dignity and use their customers purely as economic gain.”95 Resulting from this call for economic protest, African American Dallasites successfully, and collectively, boycotted downtown stores for over nine months. The financial losses felt by Neiman Marcus, Sanger’s, A. Harris, H.L. Green, S.H. Kress, and Titche-
Goettinger was significant.96
White Dallasites Compromise in Response to Brown Decision
93 In some instances, lunch counter services were not previously offered to African American patrons in some of the more ‘exclusive’ department stores downtown. Restaurants that refused African Americans included Neiman Marcus’s Zodiac Room. Specifically, the historian Brian Behnken noted that the managerial staff at H.L. Green attempted to create a makeshift lunch counter in the basement of the department store to service African American patrons. Thus, when evaluating the social regard for ‘Black’ Dallasites by White Dallasites during this time period, one could assume that their presence was merely tolerated but was unwelcome. For information on a segregated Zodiac Room ,please see the news clipping "'Sorry--Tea Room Not Integrated'; Sees No Immediate Change in Policy ", Dallas Express 7 May 1960.
94 William Brophy, "Active Acceptance--Active Containment: The Dallas Story," 144.
95 "Interracial Group Pickets H L Green Store," Dallas Express 8 October 1960; Behnken, "The 'Dallas Way'," 12-13.
96 Brophy, "Active Acceptance--Active Containment: The Dallas Story," 146. 46
The feelings held by White Dallasites toward African American Dallasites were apparent.
No matter how much they were willing to pay, African American Dallasites were unequal and inferior to Whites. Thus, the treatment of African Americans in public spaces was anything but accommodating. Expressed by the Dallas Morning News editorial staff,
The subsurface mood of [White] Texans on the internal crisis [emphasis mine] of our time—integration—ranges from anger in the East to detachment in the West. But all Texans seem united in one attitude: They do not want A Battle of Little Rock in this state. And they agree in their minds and hearts on another point: Acceptance of the eventual mixing of White and ‘Negro’ races . . . but over a range of time. They feel that if pushed too quickly, violence may erupt . . . . The great prayer, a consensus indicates, is that orderly processes of the law can be achieved without ‘bayonets at their throats’ action by federal troops. [In the case for civil rights, Dallas is no different, with side issues—political, economic, social, being numerous.]97
Regardless of popular consensus to delay the desegregation of public spaces, the (de)segregation of the races was on the horizon. Working in collaboration with seven African American community leaders, the Dallas Citizens Council formed the Committee of 14 in the early 1960s.
This committee was established to better address social issues that plagued and dampened the image of the city. Of particular interest to White civic leaders was the maintenance of Dallas’
97 Staff-Produced Interpretation, "Mood of Texas: How It Feels on Integration " Dallas Morning News 6 October 1957. The statement “A Battle of Little Rock” was made in regards to President Dwight D. Eisenhower sending federally-trained soldiers to Central High School to protect nine African American students as they arrived and returned home from school each day. Arkansas Governor Orval E. Faubus had previously ordered the Arkansas National Guard to the school in September 1957 with the sole agenda of prohibiting African American students from entering the building. In effect, the Arkansas National Guard, under direct order of their governor, aided in the segregationist agenda. For general information in the Little Rock Crisis, please see also: Melba Pattillo Beals, Warriors Don't Cry: Searing Memoir of Battle to Integrate Little Rock (New York: Washington Square Press, 1995); David L Chappell, Inside Agitators: White Southerners in the Civil Rights Movement (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994).
47 outward appearance. Therefore, task forces were created to peaceably address the demonstrations that were orchestrated by the local NAACP chapter.98
The collaboration of African American and White civic leaders led to the desegregation of Dallas movie theaters in 1961. Their joint partnership also resulted in the desegregation of public parks in 1963.99 Further, just days shy of the federal acknowledgment and overhaul of civil rights violations in 1964, the City of Dallas peacefully and quietly desegregated several other public spaces. However, several believe that the reason for such transformative change regarding race relations was due in large part to the desire to maintain the economic clout of the city.100 Summated by Bill Minutaglio and Steven L. Davis, “The Dallas Citizens Council [was]
98 Originally the idea NAACP national Executive Director Roy Wilkins, African American and White civic leaders formed the Committee of 14 to ward off violence, as the result of segregation. In fact, the historian W. Marvin Dulaney summated, “The ‘Committee of 14’ was supported in its work by the Dallas Community Committee (DCC), headed by Rev. E.C. Estell, pastor of St. John’s Baptist Church. Organized in August, 1960, the interracial DCC consisted of members of the NAACP, the Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance (IMA), and other church and civic groups in the city. The DCC’s charge was to carry out the activities for improving race relations and desegregating public life that resulted from the negotiations of the Committee of 14. A. Maceo Smith made regular [weekly] reports about the Committee of 14’s negotiations and decisions to Rev. Estell, who then directed the DCC in implementing and supporting desegregation activities” Dulaney, "Whatever Happened to the Civil Rights Movement in Dallas, Texas?," 79. For general information on the Committee of 14 and the Dallas Community Committee, please see also: Brian Behnken, "The 'Dallas Way': Protest, Response, and the Civil Rights Experience in Big D and Beyond." William Brophy, "Active Acceptance--Active Containment: The Dallas Story," in Southern Businessmen and Desegregation, ed. Elizabeth Jacoway and David R. Colburn (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1982); Bill Minutaglio and Steven L. Davis, Dallas 1963.
99 Bill Minutaglio and Steven L. Davis, Dallas 1963, 92.
100 Scholars who have studied the business-savvy technique used by the economically-affluent powerhouse that was the Dallas Citizens Council have assessed the intent and motivations behind its desegregation campaign initiatives. Michael Phillips, Harvey Graff, and a host of other historians are of the opinion that only when faced with a challenge did the Dallas Citizens Council compromise. For instance, when faced with the possibility of unwelcome and displeasing desegregation litigation, the Council proactively responded with delayed desegregation plans. The 10 September 1950 Dallas Morning News article titled “Record Number of Lawsuits Attack Segregation in Texas” by Dawson Duncan supports this perspective. For general information of the decision-making process of the Dallas Citizens Council, please see also: Michael Phillips, "The Fire This Time: The Battle over Racial, Regional and Religious Identities in Dallas, Texas, 1860-1990" (PhD diss., The University of Texas at Austin, 2002); Harvey J. Graff, The Dallas Myth: The Making and Unmaking of an American City; Bill Minutaglio and Steven L. Davis, Dallas 1963; W. Marvin Dulaney, "Whatever Happened to the Civil Rights Movement in Dallas, Texas?"; Jim Schutze, The Accommodation: The Politics of Race in an American City; Brophy, "Active Acceptance- 48 coming to a consensus built on enlightened self-interest: [They’d] have to bend . . . or risk destroying what [they] built in Dallas.”101
Yet, in response to the request that the entire State Fair of Texas and all of its entities be desegregated, Dallas’ White leaders actively refused. In fact, Dallas Mayor R. L. Thornton went so far as to release a statement in support of the racial practices at the State Fair of Texas.102
Mayor Thornton, alongside his business colleagues, did not wish to compromise with African
American street activists. Rather than use open settings to address matters of public interest, the city’s White civic leadership wished to compromise by eradicating social issues surrounding race
-Active Containment: The Dallas Story"; Dawson Duncan, "Record Number of Lawsuits Attack Segregation in Texas," Dallas Morning News, 10 September 1950.
101 Bill Minutaglio and Steven L. Davis, Dallas 1963, 79.
102 It is particularly important that I adequately explain the dynamics between the State Fair of Texas and the larger Dallas community. The State Fair of Texas, open from mid-September to mid-October, is the largest state fair in the United States. It is located in South Dallas. South Dallas was historically an all-White area, prior to African American Dallasites relocating there from the slums of the Trinity River and the West Dallas areas. Today, South Dallas is an all-Black working class and low-income enclave. However, it remains the historic home of many enterprises including the legendary Forest Theatre, the Music Hall at Fair Park, several Black-owned businesses and civic groups including the Dallas Black Chamber of Commerce, and most importantly, the State Fair of Texas. Midway, located in the central walking grounds of the State Fair, is a very popular destination for tourists and annual fair attendees. Midway offers amusement park-style rides, a larger than life observatory wheel that provides a bird’s eye view of the City’s skyline, a variety of infamous deep-fried foods as well as games and musical concerts. While the fair’s stadium the “Cotton Bowl,” plays host to annual rival colligate football games including the classic “Red River Shootout” played by The University of Texas at Austin versus Oklahoma University, and the well- known HBCU classic of Prairie View A&M University versus Grambling University, the State Fair of Texas also offers extensive car shows, wine tastings, and livestock animal petting exhibitions. However, prior to the complete desegregation of the fair, none of these activities were made available to African American patrons, with exception of the livestock show which had an annual “Negro” show. Journalist Jim Schutze further detailed that until the mid- 1960s, “The State Fair of Texas would still be deciding which child in Texas that year had raised the best ‘Negro’ pig or chicken and which had been the best New ‘Negro’ Homemaker or New ‘Negro’ Farmer of the Year” Jim Schutze, The Accommodation: The Politics of Race in an American City, 96. To be clear, while ‘open’ to African American Dallasites as early as 1953, the fair remained segregated, unequal, and unconcerned with providing an equally enjoyable experience for all people, especially African Americans. For additional general information on the State Fair of Texas, please also see: Nancy N. Wiley, The Great State Fair of Texas: An Illustrated History (Dallas : Taylor Publishing Company, 1985); Patricia Evridge Hill, Dallas: The Making of a Modern City (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1996). John H. Slate, Historic Dallas Parks (Charleston: Arcadia Publishing, 2010).
49 relations behind closed doors and in the boardroom. However, the collective power of the
African American community forced Dallas’ White civic leaders to reach a positive solution.
For example, as a result of the eight-month long lunch counter protests by African
American Dallasites, the Committee of 14 successfully negotiated with merchants to bring about desegregated leisure spaces throughout their stores and restaurants. To summate,
On July 26 [1961] approximately forty business establishments allowed ‘Blacks’ to eat at the lunch counters . . . . There were no incidents at any of the business establishments and there were no arrests. Other than the facilities at the aforementioned stores, restaurants and lunch counters were integrated at Sears, Walgreen’s, Love Field (the city’s old airport), the Continental Bus Depot (the lunchroom of the Greyhound Bus Depot was already desegregated), and the Union Fidelity Life Insurance Building . . . . Within six months of the school desegregation date the hotels in Dallas were accepting guests without regard to race. Local government agencies also adopted changes which improved race relations [and African American employment opportunities]. . . . Power elites from both the ‘Black’ and White sectors of the population were deeply involved in the desegregation effort.103
Thus it was clear that change was on the horizon. Although the civil rights efforts by
African American Dallasites were largely withheld from newspapers, it is evident that the Civil
Rights Movement did indeed arrive in Dallas, Texas.104 The work of participants and countless
103 Minutaglio and Davis, Dallas 1963, 146-149.
104 With regard to the limited publication of Civil Rights Movement activities in Dallas, William Brophy explained that, “Through a tacit agreement the city’s major newspapers refused to cover the demonstrations. The intent of this agreement was to deny publicity to those engaging in acts of civil disobedience and thereby minimize the tension level in the city . . . . Both ‘Black’ and white leaders agreed that desegregation was a local problem [emphasis mine] and should be dealt with at the local level by citizens of the city. Jim Schutze, The Accommodation: The Politics of Race in an American City, 145-150. In contrast, journalists Bill Minutaglio and Steven L. Davis blamed the socially-conservative shrewdness of Ted Dealey, the son of Dallas Morning News founder and publisher George Dealey, on the city’s renunciation of publicized civil rights efforts. Duly noted by Minutaglio and Davis in February 1961 was that, “Ted Dealey’s Dallas Morning News is refusing to linger on the protests in downtown Dallas led by Rhett James and Juanita Craft. It is as if his paper believes that their demands will vanish by refusing to acknowledge them. The paper has even suggested that ‘Black’ Dallas is divided, splintered, that a few activities are presuming to speak for the entire ‘Black’ populace. [These allegations are unfounded, however]. Bill Minutaglio and Stevel L. Davis, Dallas 1963, 76. However given the evidence examined, historians may find that newspaper distributors chose not to publicize the civil rights events in Dallas because such publications casted a dark cloud over the economic and business-friendly light that sustained the city. The image, economy, and the maintenance of 50 sung and unsung heroes are responsible for moving the City of Dallas forward. Whereas city- level civil rights protests brought about the desegregation of public establishments, activism efforts also eventually brought about a (de)segregated Dallas Independent School District. Yet, the journey toward achieving equality of access in the city’s public schools took much more effort, relentless pursuit, and time.
While it has been noted that hotels and other facilities desegregated just six months after the 1961 implementation of the stair-step plan by the Dallas Independent School District, it is also doubly important to reiterate that desegregation did not become a reality for Dallas public school students for several years. Regardless of circumstance, African Americans continuously faced adversity in the city’s public schools by addressing deep-seated racial injustice head on.
The legal know how of African American Dallasites single-handedly helped to make for a transformed and more just Dallas Independent School District. Although their social activism efforts were years in the making, their journey would not be in vein.
local customs had been the goal of the city’s leadership for several decades. Issues surrounding race relations posed to threaten the establishment of Dallas as a pristine and untouchable city. Plainly summated by Patricia E. Gower, “Those in control believed that they could protect their personal interests as well as the public interest better . . . .[This was the belief held by the Dallas Citizens Council and the Committee of 14.]”Patricia E. Gower, "Contrasts in Neglect: Progressive Municipal Reform in Dallas and San Antonio," in Seeking Inalienable Rights: Texans and Their Quest for Justice, ed. Debra A. Reid (College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2009), 77. 51
CHAPTER 4
AFRICAN AMERICAN LEGAL ACTIVISM IN DALLAS, 1960s-1970s
Historical Overview
Argued during the crux of the American Civil Rights Movement, public school desegregation cases displayed the intense need for American society to address the fallacies of justice and equality. However, the projected ease of dissolving dual schooling institutions into uniform operational systems was both gravely miscalculated and underestimated by the federal government. For instance, President John F. Kennedy highlighted the successful desegregation efforts of Southern cities when he publicly expressed that,
In the past two weeks [of September 1963], schools in 150 Southern cities have been desegregated [emphasis mine]. There may have been some difficulties, but to the great credit of the vast majority of the citizens and public officials of these communities, this transition has been made with understanding and respect for the law. The task was not easy. The emotions underlying segregation have persisted for generations, and in many instances leaders in these communities have had to overcome their own personal attitudes as well as the ingrained social attitudes of the communities. In some instances the obstacles were greater, even to the point of physical interference. Nevertheless, as we have seen, what prevailed in these cities through the South finally was not emotion but respect for law. The courage and responsibility of these community leaders in those places provide a meaningful lesson not only for the children in those cities but for the children all over the country.105
Although desegregation initiatives were lauded in 1963, the reality was that desegregation plans and enforcement measures were in fact executed at a delayed pace in many urban cities, including Dallas, Texas. 106 To be sure, delay was the reason the historian Paul Green determined
105 News Conference statement by President John F. Kennedy titled, “Southern Progress in School Desegregation.” This news conference took place on 12 September 1963. Allan Nevins and John F. Kennedy, eds., The Burden and the Glory: The Hopes and Purposes of President Kennedy's Second and Third Years in Office as Revealed in His Public Statements and Addresses (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1964), 185.
106 For example, just outside of the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex is the small city of Mansfield, Texas. During this time period, the City of Mansfield had a small population of African American people. Mansfield, a then de jure segregated town, refused to honor the Brown v. Board of Education ruling. The city therefore maintained segregated high schools for students. The all-African American high school in Mansfield was severely inadequate. 52 that ten years following the Brown decision, a record ninety-nine percent of African American children were still attending racially segregated schools.107 The actions of some Whites to literally stand as physical barriers to school desegregation prohibited African American and
White students from attending school together.
Historian Pete Daniel described the shanty-like structure that was used to educate all of Mansfield’s African American students. In addition to the destitute physical space, the school employed only one teacher to educate eight grade levels of students. To be clear, the all-African American Mansfield school only offered schooling for grades 1- 8. African Americans living in Mansfield therefore had no opportunity to attend high school, or even to receive a high school diploma. African American history expert Ramona Houston inferred that it was the work of the White Citizens Council and other segregationists who were responsible for the violent protests in the North Texas town. Houston denoted that, “In response to the federal court order to integrate Mansfield High School, mob violence erupted in September 1956. Over three hundred furious Mansfield Whites, mostly males, congregated at the school and prevented three African American teenagers from registering. The ‘Black’ parents’ attorney, L. Clifford Davis, even attempted to register the students by telegram, but to no avail. Given the mob violence, Davis also asked Governor Shivers and Homer Garrison, Director of the Texas Department of Public Safety, to send additional law enforcement officers to the area but state officials ignored the requests. Given the violent outbreaks in the first week, and the refusal of state leadership to provide protection and assist in the efforts to desegregate the school, the NAACP attorneys decided to end efforts to desegregate Mansfield High School at that time.” Ramona Houston, "The NAACP State Conference in Texas: Intermediary and Catalyst for Change, 1937-1957," Journal of African American History 94, no. 4 (2009), 521. Just as segregationists rallied Mansfield High School to “protect” it from desegregation, Texas Governor Allan Shivers called in the Texas Rangers to uphold the letter of Texas law in order to maintain segregation. Governor Shivers stated, as noted by historian Robyn Ladino, that “It is not my intention to permit the use of state officers or troops to shoot down or intimidate Texas citizens who are making orderly protest against a situation instigated and agitated by the National Organization for the Advancement of Colored People. At the same time we will protect persons of all races who are not themselves contributing to the breach of peace. If this course is not satisfactory under the circumstances to the Supreme Court, which is responsible for the order, be given the task of enforcing it.” Robyn Duff Ladino, Desegregating Texas Schools: Eisenhower, Shivers, and the Crisis at Mansfield High (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2010), 103. Historian Ladino further contended that, “the governor’s actions ensured that segregation was maintained in Mansfield. Texas Rangers were sent to Mansfield to keep peace and not to offer aid or escort African American students who sought enrollment at the White high school.” Ibid. Further, although President Dwight Eisenhower was aware of the chaos and violent threats posed in this North Texas town, no federal action was taken to prevent violence or to assist with the desegregation process. Resulting from such fierce objection to absolute equality of the laws, African American students were subjected to attend school in the run-down shanty for an additional eight years. Yet, historian Robyn Ladino called attention to the relentless and courageous work of the African American community. Ladino concluded by noting that, “In the fall of 1956, without Mansfield’s African American adults fully realizing it, the seed of the Civil Rights Movement was planted and sown for their children to reap benefits from. Their efforts raised the consciousness of Texas and the nation to the growing movement for equal justice in all aspects of life in the United States for all citizens.” Ibid, 143. For additional detailed information on the crisis at Mansfield High, please see also: ; Pete Daniel, Lost Revolutions: The South in the 1950s (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2000).
107 Paul Green, "The Paradox of the Promised Unfulfilled: Brown v. Board of Education and the Continued Pursuit of Excellence in Education," Journal of Negro Education 73, no. 3 (2004). Ramona Houston, "The NAACP State Conference in Texas: Intermediary and Catalyst for Change, 1937-1957." 53
Juxtaposed to actions like those taken in both Little Rock, Arkansas, and New Orleans,
Louisiana, the Dallas Morning News specifically emphasized the extent to which large Texas cities, especially Dallas, also ineffectively executed federal orders as under Brown.108 Such dissonance punctured the discourse between those whom were proponents of desegregation activity and those whom stood in direct opposition to the goals of equality and impartiality for all people.109 Therefore, this chapter chronicles the legal journey of African American Dallasites as
108 Further, in 1962 the Orleans School Parish Board was required to begin the integration process of its school via the stair-step plan, as had been adopted in Dallas in 1961. Nonetheless, in 1960 African American children were forcibly turned away from all-White elementary schools and prohibited from entering. To read a news publication on New Orleans’ adoption of the Dallas influenced stair-step plan, please see: (UPI), "Louisiana's Pupil Placement Outlawed; Texas Effect Eyed," Dallas Morning News 1962.For a historical review of the 1960 New Orleans school desegregation crisis, please see: Robert Coles, The Story of Ruby Bridges (Bloomindale: Scholastic Press Inc., 1995); Ruby Bridges, Through My Eyes: The Autobiography of Ruby Bridges (Bloomindale: Scholastic Press Inc., 1999); Gloria Ladson-Billings, "Introduction," in Education Research in the Public Interest: Social Justice, Action, and Policy, eds. Gloria. Ladson-Billings and William F. Tate, Multicultural Education (New York: Teachers College Press, 2006).
109 Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, also became a shameful depiction of White supremacy and bigotry. In 1957 Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus refused to allow nine school-aged African American students to enter Central High School. At the time, Central High School was an all-White school. Although President Dwight D. Eisenhower activated the Arkansas National Guard to ensure that the students would safely enter the premises, Governor Faubus utilized executive power. He later closed the school system’s high schools the following year. Resulting from this, African American high school students were forced to seek an education outside of the state. In 1959, the Little Rock school board voted to reopen the city’s high schools. Yet, the outspoken words and actions by many of the city’s White residents were already negatively portrayed in the media. Although the Little Rock Nine, as they were called, were later allowed to enter the once all-White school, they experienced feelings of scrutiny, adversity, hate, violence, and discouragement. In fact, when recounting her feelings about desegregating Central High School, heroine Melba Pattillo Beals expressed that she endured tremendous harassment. However, Beals relentlessly stood strong in the face of her oppressor. Beals passionately remembered that, “During my junior year in high school, I lived at the center of a violent civil rights conflict. In 1954, the Supreme Court had decreed an end to segregated schools. Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus and states’ rights segregationalists [sic] defied that ruling. President Eisenhower was compelled to confront Faubus—to use U.S. soldiers to force him to obey the law of the land. It was a historic confrontation that generated worldwide attention . . . . On our first day at Central High, Governor Faubus dispatched gun-toting Arkansas National Guard soldiers to prevent [emphasis added] us from entering. Mother and I got separated from the others. The two of us narrowly escaped a rope-carrying lynch mob of men and women shouting that they they’d kill us rather than see me go to school with their children. Three weeks later, having won a court order, we ‘Black’ children maneuvered our way past an angry mob to enter the side door of Central High.” Melba Pattillo Beals, Warriors Don't Cry: Searing Memoir of Battle to Integrate Little Rock (New York: Washington Square Press, 1995), 1. Such unyielding courage has been the pinnacle of faith, strength, and the unbreakable spirit of the “Black” community. This courage dates back to the sixteenth century vis-à-vis the African American community’s initial fight for educational liberation and justice. For general information on the crisis at Little Rock, please see also: Frances L. Baer, Resistance to Public School Desegregation: Little Rock, Arkansas, and Beyond (El Paso: LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC, 2008). Pete Daniel, Lost Revolutions: The South in the 1950s. Also, for general reading on the boycotts against public school desegregation orders in New Orleans, Louisiana, please see: Kim Lacy Rogers, Righteous Lives: Narratives of the New Orleans Civil Rights Movement (New York: 54 it relates to the fight for implementing school desegregation strategies. To do this, it is imperative to better assess how Dallas’ African American community influenced, affected, and later revolutionized the city’s delayed desegregation efforts in order to advocate for the implementation of progressive and transformative plans, as it relates to public school desegregation. Particularly requiring assessment is how civic leaders tactfully addressed racial and educational issues, so as not to undermine the reputation of Dallas. By conducting such detailed research, I wish to offer an analysis surrounding how the city’s public schooling system began to transform in the latter portion of the twentieth century.
Dallas Schools and the Question of Desegregation
Documented by journalist Marquita Moss for the Dallas Morning News column Austin
Bureau of The News was a statement made by Texas Education Agency educational program director J.R. Hutchinson. Hutchinson emphasized that, “[In 1967] Districts with a large percentage of ‘Negro’ students [were] experiencing the difficult problem of having adequate facilities that [would] permit them to bring the schools together into a single unit.”110 Reasons like this were used in several large cities as a way to detain desegregation protocol. Citing issues of inadequate facilities ran rampant well into the 1960s.111 Therefore schooling inequality persisted. For instance, Dallas civil rights attorney Louis A. Bedford, Jr. recalled, as documented
New York University Press, 1994); Thomas F. Pettigrew and Robert L. Green, "School Desegregation in Large Cities: A Critique of the Coleman 'White Flight' Thesis," Harvard Educational Review 46, no. 1 (1976).
110 Marquita Moss, "Dual Systems Generally Abolished in Texas: Large City School Districts Lag in Desegregation," Dallas Express July 1967.
111 To be clear, Little Rock, Arkansas, became a poster-child of desegregation initiatives gone wrong. For first-hand accounts as well as for general reading on the crisis in Little Rock, please see: Melba P. Beals, Warriors Don't Cry: Searing Memoir of Battle to Integrate Little Rock; Frances L. Baer, Resistance to Public School Desegregation: Little Rock, Arkansas, and Beyond; Wiley A. Branton, "Little Rock Revisited: Desegregation to Resegregation," The Journal of Negro Education 52, no. 3 (1983); Tony A. Freyer, "Enforcing Brown in the Little Rock Crisis," The Journal of Appellate Practice & Process 6(2004). 55 by historian Darwin Payne, that “classrooms were so crowded [in African American only schools] during Louis’s freshman year that students attended school in two shifts, the first from 8
AM to noon and the second from 1 to 5 PM. Ninth-and tenth-grade students attended in the morning, juniors and seniors in the afternoons.”112
It has previously been noted by Texas historians that White school-aged children, however, were historically provided a public education of particular quality vis-à-vis taxpayer monies. Although taxpayer monies were allocated for African American children as well,
African American students did not receive a comparable education. Indeed, it was not until the twentieth century that the State Constitution of Texas, which mandated that all school-aged residents be offered a free and appropriate public education, was challenged on account of the quality of public schooling provided for African Americans.113 Even then, equality was a hope in the unforeseen.
African American Texans, like C.O. Rogers, were conscious of the inequality of resources and opportunities offered to them because of their race. Specifically denoted in a 1941 newspaper editorial submitted by C.O. Rogers of Bishop College in Marshall, Texas, to the
African American-owned Dallas Express was that,
The report in The News of April 6 regarding educational expenditures for the year shows a considerable sum is being spent for education in Texas. The average sum spent per child in the public school is $60 and in the higher education institutions $320. However encouraging these averages appear, some questions arise. What is the distribution so far as the public schools are concerned? Where does the
112 Darwin Payne, Quest for Justice: Louis A. Bedford Jr. And the Struggle for Equal Rights in Texas (Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 2009), 38.
113 For detailed information on the establishment of the free and appropriate public education (FAPE) clause and how the State of Texas assumed responsibility for supplying all state inhabitants with a basic education, please see: T.C. Sinclair and Werner F. Grunbaum, Personal Rights and Liberties: The Constitution of Texas with Its 140 Patches (Dallas: Arnold Foundation Monographs: Southern Methodist University, 1960); Michael V. Hazel, Dallas: A History of" Big D" (Denton: Texas State Historical Assocation Press, 1997). 56
‘Negro’ child stand in the distribution? What percentage of the ‘Negro’ scholastics receive [sic] the average, get more than the average, get less? Will the educational expenditures give the ‘Negro’ an equitable chair around the work table of national economy, enable him to do his part in sustaining American democracy and cause him to feel that he has a real part as a participant in American ideals? In fine, does and will it provide for the ‘Negro’ youth an opportunity to play ball in this great American game, or the mere chance of throwing foul balls back over the fence onto the playing field? The facts regarding higher education for ‘Negroes’ and Whites be definitely stated [sic]. The number of White colleges supported by the state is sixteen, the number for ‘Negroes.’ 1. [sic] In the White colleges are 60,528 students; in the ‘Negro’ college, 1,935. That is, 31.2 times as many White students as supported by the state as ‘Negroes.’ The average pupil cost is higher in the White colleges than in the ‘Negro,’ $308.15 and $299.16, respectively.. . . . The conclusions are one population six times as large as the other, in a dual system of education, spends 33.6 times as much on its youth, sends 31.2 times as many to tax-supported colleges, spends more per student on its youth, and for the instant reduces it expenditures, on the whole, by little better than half as much, on the percentage basis, as is done for the ‘Negro’ group.114
Clearly, the caliber of schooling opportunities offered to African American Dallasites remained largely inadequate and inferior to those offered to White students.
Adding to this, Mr. Stanley, an older White male who had served the Dallas Independent
School District as Principal of Zan Wesley Holmes, Jr. Middle School in 1958, recounted the
DISD superintendent’s stance on desegregation in light of Brown. In a 2003 oral history interview, Stanley expressed,
I went there [Dallas] in 1955, soon after the Brown decision that came in 1954. There was some stirring that ‘Blacks’ would attempt to enroll in the schools. [Superintendent Dr. Warren Travis White] instructed us that they would not be permitted to enroll, and that we were to take information from each person trying to enroll. When school started, I looked out the window of my office and there was a ‘Black’ man and a child on the steps of the school and they didn’t come in. So, for whatever reasons, I went out and said, ‘How can I help you?’ and he said, ‘I want to enroll my boy in school.’ And, I explained to them I was not authorized to do that, and I took the information and departed. I don’t recall when it happened, soon after the experience [the next spring] but Thurgood Marshall filed suit. He had a hearing at Judge William Harley Atwell’s district court. All of us were instructed to appear. I was never subpoenaed. I don’t know if Dr. White was
114 C. O. Rogers, "Letters from Readers: Education for Negroes," Dallas Express 1941. 57
subpoenaed or not, but he was the only person that was put on the stand.’ Dr. White gave smart aleck responses and… Judge Atwell instructed him to show proper respect when answering the questions. It was the only time in my life when I’ve seen Dr. White subdued. Of course, from there we showed all deliberate speed. Very, very deliberate. [Yet], nothing happened for years.115
Further highlighted by Sam Kinch, Jr. were the ways in which desegregation efforts were questionably oblique, in the city of Dallas, Texas, even fifteen years following the Brown decision. Although the first desegregation claim filed against the school district occurred in
September 1955 in the suit Bell v. Rippy, the City of Dallas was believed to have been hiding the extent to which the district made earnest and corrective efforts in regards to the dissolution of its dual schooling system. Journalist Sam Kinch Jr., for the Dallas Morning News column
Washington Bureau of The News summated that, “[In 1969] the Dallas Independent School
District (DISD) was the only large school system in the south that did not report its desegregation statistics to the [Health, Education, and Welfare] civil rights office. Dallas, which
[was] still under a court order to desegregate its schools, also did not report the statistics [in the previous year]. School Superintendent, Dr. Nolan Estes [followed up by stating that] the Dallas
Independent School District does not report information ‘in that manner.’”116
115 This is an excerpt from a video recorded oral history interview. There are two interviews archived by the researcher. Both participants are older White males who served as school administrators in the Dallas Independent School District at the time of Brown v. Board of Education. These principals were also school administrators when the initial desegregation suits by African American Dallasites were filed. Thus, while my research project offers the perspective of African American Dallasites prior to and following the Brown decision, I also wanted to highlight a counter-narrative based upon race, social status, and experience during the same time period. Unfortunately at the time of my archival data collection, the University of Texas at Austin Center for American History, Briscoe Center for American History had relocated some of its school desegregation sources to the attic. Because of that, I could not obtain the appropriate name of the Texas A&M University history professor whom conducted the interviews. However, the interviews have been made available at The University of Texas at Austin Center for American History. If you would like to watch the interviews of Mr. Stanley and Mr. Arnold Fox, please see: DISD Desegregation Oral History Collection, (Austin: University of Texas at Austin, Briscoe Center for American History, 2003), Oral History Interviews of White Male Administrators in DISD during the time of Brown v. Board of Education.
116 Sam Kinch Jr., "Texas Again Leading South in Desegregation of Schools," Dallas Morning News 17 January 1969. 58
Yet, historian Martin V. Melosi noted that a 1966 study conducted by Walter Schiebel for the Dallas Independent School District contrastingly believed itself to have been widely successful in the district’s implementation of its conservative and token desegregation initiatives.
Schiebel indicated that, “desegregation of the Dallas Schools was accomplished in the course of ten short years with a minimum of commotion and stress. This may be viewed as just short of miraculous.”117 Juxtaposed to the assertion that the Dallas Independent School District experienced a mind-blowing and perfect desegregation effort, school principal Mr. Stanley further contended that, “Nothing [emphasis mine] happened for years. Attempts [to desegregate] were being made and it became apparent to me, and I think to most other people, that desegregation was going to take place. And I will use the term they [the district’s central administrative office staff] used. It wasn’t integration. It was desegregation.”118
The additional conduction of evaluations by outside researchers and concerned community members revealed several inconsistencies regarding program execution.
Additionally, numerous reports also highlighted the overall inadequacy of the district’s desegregation plans. Anonymously expressed in a resident editorial entitled, “Surprise—
Discrimination!” was that,
The National Council of Churches, the NAACP and other right groups have been down in Dixie nitpicking the claims of the administration that peaceful integration is in wholesale progress there. To hear the investigators tell it, the government is lying by the calendar—not only are the unitary school districts it brags of still largely segregated, but resegregation is going on, too, say the watchdogs. Even in integrated schools, they add, discrimination is as ‘blatant’ as it was under the old system. Some schools are even segregating within classrooms. Well, it was predicted a long time ago that neither Nixon nor any other president is going to
117 Martin V. Melosi, "Dallas-Forth Worth: Marketing the Metroplex," in Sunbelt Cities: Politics and Growth since World War II, eds. Richard M. Bernard and Bradley R. Rice (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1983), 189.
118 DISD Desegregation Oral History Collection. 59
call out the marshals or the troops to dragoon several thousand districts into strict adherence to some formula. It’s the defiant districts which will feel the lash. There are few of those left. But as the investigators have discovered, bad faith and bad practices are a lot harder to deal with than a governor standing in the schoolhouse door or district daring the government to do its worst. Instead of saying what a lousy job the government is doing and how it ought to have somebody monitoring every school for signs of backsliding, the National Council of Churches, et al., would do better to acknowledge that new laws don’t make new people [emphasis mine].119
Shortly after the surge of community disappointment, the Dallas Independent School
District became quite embarrassed when it publically suffered a multitude of lawsuits concerning the district’s desegregation practices and its maintenance of dual schooling systems. The first of those was Bell v. Rippy. The last of which was Tasby v. Estes. Nonetheless, “from the beginning, the Civic Committee was aware of the harmful consequences should the community exhibit open hostility to the law. The stakes were high. Dallas’ national image, which many leaders had spent years developing, could be almost irreparably damaged in such an instance.”120
Therefore, African American Dallasites were self-empowered to seek justice peaceably in court, while White Dallasites faced the task of discerning whether to civically compromise or face the likelihood of economic and image derision.
Dallas Independent School District’s 1960s Legal Case Trajectory
Litigated by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP),
Bell v. Rippy (1955) was the first suit leveraged against the Dallas Independent School District.
In the four months following Brown II, this civil action was filed by members of the Dallas
African American community. As the historian William Brophy noted,
119 Anonymous Writer, "Suprise--Discrimination!," Dallas Express 28 December 1970.
120 Carol Estes Thometz, The Decision-Makers: The Power Structure of Dallas (Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963), 66. 60
The desegregation story in Dallas began a few months after the Supreme Court’s implementation decision of May 31, 1955, in the case of Brown v. Board of Education. In September, 1955, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People filed suit in behalf of twenty-four ‘Negro’ plaintiffs in the case of Bell v. Rippy. The two principal attorneys for the NAACP, W. J. Durham and C. B. Bunkley, were both citizens of Dallas and veterans of the civil rights struggle. Durham and Bunkley had been the attorneys in the cases of Smith v. Allwright (the white primary case) and Sweatt v. Painter (the University of Texas School of Law desegregation case).121
Although the case was quickly dismissed by Judge William Harley Atwell in the United States
District Court of the Northern District of Texas: Dallas Division, the legal issue of Bell v. Rippy would resurface in the years and decades following its swift dismissal. In fact, parents of African
American schoolchildren would once again filed suit to request remedy to attend school nearest to their residence.122 In its appellate case, the plaintiffs cited the district court’s decision of summary judgment. While steadily upholding the segregation of the races, and rejecting their claim once again, Judge Atwell went so far as to subtly express his uncertainty regarding opportunity and fairness, should the city’s public schools be desegregated in the future. In his closing statement, Judge Atwell specifically expressed that,
We must bear in mind that the laws of Texas, for a long time in existence and based upon a constitutional provision, provide for public schools which shall be financed out of and from taxation. For many years, the ‘Colored’ people of Texas have been their own teachers, and have had their own teachers and their own school facilities and pupils of their own color. The White people have had their own schools with appropriate facilities and teachers. . . . I believe that it will be seen that the [Supreme] Court based its decision on no law but rather on what the Court regarded as mere authoritative, modern psychological knowledge that existed at the time that the now discarded doctrine of equal facilities was initiated. . . . The testimony, which has been fully developed under the pleadings of each
121 William Brophy, "Active Acceptance--Active Containment: The Dallas Story," in Southern Businessmen and Desegregation, eds. Elizabeth Jacoway and David R. Colburn (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1982), 137-138.
122 The filing was based upon age and corresponding grade level as opposed to addressing the fact that African American children were being forced to attend a particular school based on their race or color. Bell v. Rippy, 133 F. Supp. 811(1955). 61
side in this case, as directed by the majority opinion of the Circuit Court of Appeals, shows unmistakenly [sic] that competent teachers, equal school facilities, and text books, and all sorts of school paraphernalia are furnished to both the White and ‘Colored’ schools and pupils, and so the sole question for the determination of this Court of Equity [emphasis mine] is whether the keeping apart [sic] of the two races is a deprivation of any constitutional right. There is no complaint against the ‘Colored’ teachers, though we might quite appropriately inquire what would become of the ‘Colored’ teachers if and when the ‘Colored’ students are taken away from them. Is it possible, or, probable that the ‘Colored’ teachers would be hired to teach the White pupils? [emphasis mine]. . . . It seems to me, in view of the facts, that the White schools are hardly sufficient to hold the present number of White students; that it would be unthinkably and unbearably wrong to require the White students to get out so that the ‘Colored’ students could come in. That would be the result of integration here. . . . I see no equity here, gentlemen, which would require an injunction which would compel integration as prayed and sought at this time. I, therefore, dismiss this suit without prejudice in order that the School Board may have ample time, as it appears to be doing, to work out this problem.123
Although Judge Atwell inferred that the Dallas school board was consciously and proactively working to remedy school segregation, the lack of action by the board left much to be desired.
To summate, segregated schooling facilities, and with them dually-operated schooling systems, continued to function in Dallas following the court’s dismissal of Bell v. Rippy.
As it relates to the social activism efforts by African American Dallasites, and their initial proactive zeal to bring about the dissolution of two school districts, their efforts were met with
123 Ibid. Indeed, as this viewpoint later became a reality several African American teachers were terminated. Consequently, some African American teachers began attending open forums hosted by the Tri-Ethnic Committee. This was done to air their grievances regarding employment termination from the Dallas Independent School District. For instance, Mrs. Patsy Requite stated, before the Tri-Ethnic Committee that, “I worked at George Washing Carver for four years as a Title I teacher. During the summer of 1971-1972, I went down to the administration building and talked with Ms. McCook and Ms. John Sunturner. And, Mr. Sunturner told me that we just had too many ‘Black’ teachers. That was the reason he gave me for not hiring me.” Patsy Requite continued by saying, “And also, Ms. McCook had a lady to call me for a job. She had a sick child and she asked would I come over every day and teach her child. I told her, I would be unable to do this. . . . During this time, we had two vacancies at school: one was for a kindergarten teacher. My principal called the administration building at least four or five times and asked would they hire me for this position. Each time, he [my principal] was told it had to be a White teacher. . . . [Being an in-home tutor to sick children] was the position he offered me, in place of offering me a position with the school district. Again, I told them I would be unable to do this.” Patsy Requite, "'Black' Teachers Air Compaints at Tri-Ethnic Committee Meeting," Tasby v. Estes Proceedings 1970-2003 (Dallas: Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, Litigation Archives Division, 1973). 62 fierce sociopolitical apprehension by the city’s White leadership.124 Nonetheless, the African
American community of Dallas did not succumb to defeat.125 Subsequently, to ensure that the school district complied with the federal order, as specified by Chief Justice Earl Warren in
1954, the African American community persistently demanded equality of access. In their demand for schooling equality, African American Dallasites utilized civil appeals and filed additional educational suits against the city’s public schooling system.
For example, following the 1956 dismissal of Bell v. Rippy by the Fifth Circuit Court of
Appeals, twenty-eight African American children filed suit against the Dallas Independent
School District in 1957. On behalf of the plaintiffs, Borders v. Rippy was litigated by NAACP attorney’s Thurgood Marshall, U. Simpson Tate, W.J. Durham, among other civil rights lawyers.126 Borders, like Bell, was also filed by young African American school children seeking relief for themselves and those similarly situated on the account of being excluded from certain schools based on race or color. With its prayer of relief, Borders, whose district court ruling was
124 In fact, the Dallas Times Herald published an article regarding the likelihood of overcrowding at all- White schools, should they be desegregated. Sue Connally wrote, “The fact that ‘some schools will be extremely overcrowded’ in an integrated set up was pointed out by School Supt. W. T. White Wednesday, to the Dallas School Board, following the presentation of his first report on the problem [emphasis mine]. . . . The ‘Negroes’ are in the minority [Dr. Edwin L. Rippy, president of the board] said, and their ‘adjustment is greater.’ Of the White schools in the Dallas system, there are 53 which have no ‘Negroes’ in their boundaries. Two such White schools were listed on the table. . . . There were four junior high schools and 47 elementary [that] have no ‘Negro’ students eligible to attend. Only two [emphasis mine] ‘Negro’ schools listed were reported as having no Whites in their area. . . .” Sue Connally, "Integration Problem Outline by White," Dallas Times Herald 1956.
125 Contrary to the unshakable resiliency of Dallas’ African American community was the published assertion the African American students wished to continue attending school in segregated spaces. Richard Morehead, news staff writer for the Dallas Morning News, crafted an article for which he castigated the federal Court by asserting the unfounded conservative prose that the African American populace of Dallas wished to remain segregated, and therein reside in a dual and racially-marginalized society. The underlying purpose of the article was to situate the African American opinion in like manner to the segregationist’s viewpoint, in order to prevent public school desegregation. For the Morehead article, as published by the Dallas Morning News, please see: Richard M. Morehead, "Integration--1: Mixing Lag in Schools," Dallas Morning News November 30, 1958.
126 For the case file of Borders v. Rippy, please see: Borders v. Rippy, 247 F. 2d 268 (1957). 63 partially reversed in the Court of Appeals, was responsible for the Dallas School Board being required to exhibit a good faith start to the desegregation process. However, it would take another four years for the district to demonstrate its compliance with the court order. This court ordered desegregation effort was ruled under an appeal to Borders v. Rippy.
This was because,
On February 18, 1960, the [United States Fifth Circuit of Appeals in New Orleans] ordered the school district to file a desegregation plan by May. The Dallas school board was sharply criticized for delays in integrating its schools. The Chief Justice explained his objections in this way: ‘We’ve been engaged in legal literature for five years without action . . . actually the first step has not been taken on this matter. The School Board has not yet come forward with a plan. Words without deeds are not enough [emphasis mine].127
Complementing this, African American Dallasites implemented peaceful protest strategies like those utilized in the larger Dallas Civil Rights Movement to demand school equality. In the mid-
1960s prior to the implementation of effective desegregation efforts, Dallas Morning News and former Associated Press journalist Carlos Conde specifically contended that,
The ‘Negroes’ [were] equally as confident that the court [would] rule in their favor and order the schools integrated across the board like the Austin and San Antonio school systems, which have been totally integrated since 1956. . . . ‘Negro’ leaders say communication with school officials [had] broken down. . . . [If the courts fail to enforce the federal order], they would then resort to school boycotts and demonstrations similar to those at the Piccadilly Cafeteria a few weeks ago. The smoldering feud [Conde noted], is centered on ‘Negro’ complaints that the school board has failed to sit down with them in private meetings and let them air their grievances.128
Yet, the Dallas Independent School District as well as several White community members, attempted to prolong the process of desegregation. A multitude of town hall meetings, civic club meetings, voting referendums, and other methods were employed to organize
127 William R. Carmack and Theodore Freedman, "Field Reports on Desegregation in the South: Dallas, Texas," 6.
128 Carlos Conde, "Negro Suit Expected over School Mixing," Dallas Morning News 13 July 1964. 64 community members whom wished to prolong desegregation efforts by legally “protecting” segregated establishments. Thus, staunch segregationists wished to ignite the fuel that could disavow the “coming” that was desegregation.129 In addition to White conservative community efforts that attempted to dispel desegregation, some local newspaper publishers began utilizing their media power to entice and organize segregationists. For instance, reporter Jim Schutze reasoned that,
Since early 1954, the Dallas Morning News had been coaching the White community bluntly on what it and the levee boys obviously thought should be the new White strategy, which was to go along with legal desegregation, obey the letter of the law, wait, be calm, do nothing that would disturb commerce or peace of the city, and then find new and informal ways to maintain actual and total separation of the races. “‘Southern people who do not believe in integration should work out a retreat from legal separation by as common sense a procedure as possible,’ the Morning News said on its editorial page. ‘The Supreme Court specifically provided for at least a start in this direction. ‘After all, ‘segregation’ of races throughout the world is largely individual choice, not be law . . . ‘The court ruling for abandonment of legal separation has shocked southern Whites, yet its implications are not nearly as great as might appear on the surface. ‘Actually the decision stands or falls on acceptance by the public. If the people of the United States want to integrate at the local level, the court’s opinion will survive. If they do not, there will be circumvention, and the probability is that the court will close its eyes.’” [Jim Schutze contended that] Again, ‘Black’ leaders had to step forward and warn Dallas there would be no dispensation, that ‘Black’ people in Dallas wanted every single thing the Court ruling promised.130
129 For instance, Mr. Stanley, former Principal of Zan W. Holmes, Jr. Middle School recalled in his oral history interview that W.A. Criswell, Preacher for the First Baptist Church, made a number of racist statements that had been published by the Dallas Morning News. Indeed, Criswell published books and speeches that described his strong opposition to desegregation and how religious justice would be compromised if desegregation plans were implemented. For general reading on W.A. Criswell, former Pastor of the largest Southern Baptist Church in Dallas, please see: W.A. Criswell, "Christianity and Segregation," in Address to South Carolina (1956); Curtis W. Freeman, "Never Had I Been So Blind: W.A. Criswell's" Change" on Racial Segregation," Journal of Southern Religion 10, no. 1 (2007); Michael Phillips, White Metropolis: Race, Ethnicity, and Religion in Dallas, 1841-2001 (Phd diss., Austin: University of Texas Press, 2006); DISD Desegregation Oral History Collection.
130 Jim Schutze, The Accommodation: The Politics of Race in an American City (Secaucus: Citadel Press, 1986), 106. 65
Contrasting this, the Dallas Times Herald utilized its publishing power in such a way as to highlight the viewpoint and concerns of African American Dallasites whom advocated for desegregation and equality of opportunity. Resultantly, the Dallas Times Herald published the editorial viewpoint of Emerson Emory of Dallas. Emory sharply stated that, “If the NAACP thinks that it will find a judge in Dallas who will rule in favor of ‘Blacks,’ they will be changing judges for the next century. They must realize that the justice system has been used to replace the institution of slavery and to get rid of ‘Blacks’ who make waves. No judge in this city is going to rule fairly in a ‘Black’-White confrontation.”131 However intuitive and pessimistic some African
American Dallasites were to acts of overt and blatant discrimination, their overall zeal to obtain equal treatment and access to all the opportunities that society had to offer, continued to persist regardless of instances of disappointment. After a multi-year journey in litigation, the Dallas
Independent School District administration finally surrendered to the NAACP’s request that
DISD schools be desegregated. In sum, Borders brought about the “stair-step” plan.
Yet, historian W. Marvin Dulaney reminded us of the fierce opposition to desegregation and the ways in which duality sustained the segregationist community of Dallas. Dulaney contended that, “In 1955 Whites in Dallas formed a local version of the White Citizens Council and called it the Texas Citizens Council of Dallas. The Texas Citizens Council vowed ‘to fight to the end to maintain segregation in Texas schools.”132 Thus, the school board, with the help of the
Dallas Citizens Council and Texas State Attorney General John Ben Sheppard, was aided in its
131 This newspaper clipping, and several others like it, was obtained from the personal notes of Federal Judge William M. Taylor and Federal Judge Harold Barefoot Sanders, respectively. The clippings have been archived in the Tasby proceeding collection at Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law. Emory Emerson, "No Justice for Blacks," Dallas Times Herald 3 April 1981.
132 W. Marvin Dulaney, "Whatever Happened to the Civil Rights Movement in Dallas, Texas?," in Essays on the American Civil Rights Movement, eds. W. Marvin Dulaney and Kathleen Underwood (College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 1993), 76. 66 resistance by a new state law requiring Texas school districts to hold integration votes to determine if local residents favored school integration. Such a harsh reality was made apparent in a vote of 30,324 to 7,416 in favor of segregation. However, civic leaders consistently worked to craft desegregation plans to suffice the court’s ruling for desegregation, while also maintaining the separation of schooling systems for White and African American students, respectively.133
The aid of African American leaders, who enlisted the business savvy collective power of the Dallas Citizens Council to assist in crafting a comprehensive plan, brought about the forging of interests in late 1961. Although Carol Estes Thometz noted that it was the Dallas Citizens
Council that was chiefly responsible for the creation and implementation of the city’s desegregation plans, it is undeniable that the influence of the Council to forge desegregation plans indeed originated from the unrelenting work of the Dallas African American community.
Historian W. Marvin Dulaney detailed that it was the political advisement suggestions of
NAACP national Executive Director Roy Wilkins who influenced seven of Dallas’ African
American leaders to partner with seven Whites and thereby form the Committee of 14.134
133 In short, the initial stages of desegregation of a few elementary schools in the all-White district did not work to actively dissolve the dual schooling system in the city. Therefore, desegregation as viewed in 1961 did not address nor resolve the issue that centered on how to effectively cause the proper dissolution of a dual organizational structure. The vote to maintain segregation was published in the Dallas Morning News as well as other news outlets. Historian William Brophy also detailed the community’s rejection of desegregation in his article that documented the ways in which southwestern businessmen in Dallas approached desegregation while advocating for segregation, however subtle. William Brophy, "Active Acceptance--Active Containment: The Dallas Story," 139.
134 Due to the scarcity of research involving how African American leaders forged partnerships with White leaders, vis-à-vis interest convergence, to secure equality of schooling opportunity, White civic leaders have been glamorized while African American leaders have been marginalized. For instance, historian Glenn M. Linden only championed the Dallas Citizens Council for having led the city to peaceful assemblage and desegregation. While in fact, the chief leaders behind the school district’s desegregation initiatives were both African American and White. Nonetheless, it is important to note that some African American Dallasites contributed their input and skill-set when strategizing the best possible methods for desegregating the schools. Although African American leaders often times disagreed with the more conservative and token view held by White leaders, the influence of African American leaders and African American civic organizations was paramount in desegregating the school system. Historian Brian Behnken summated perfectly by expressing that, “The biracial committee served as a bridge between White and ‘Black’ leaders and was a common vehicle used to negotiate desegregation during the civil rights period.” Brian 67
The Committee of 14 was therein charged with the responsibility of negotiating and managing desegregation in Dallas.135 Thus, prior to implementing its initial desegregation plan, coined the
“stair-step plan,” the Dallas Independent School District school board in conjunction with the
Dallas Citizens Council and the Committee of 14, solicited the skills and abilities of communication and advertising companies. The Committee of 14 hoped that Bloom Advertising could cast Dallas in a positive light, while also lobbying Dallas residents to heed to the rules of law and order, rather than violence. Therefore, in September 1961, the stair-step plan went into effect, with all of the nation’s eyes placed upon the city. As everyone watched to witness Dallas’ attempt to amicably desegregate, tensions ran high. Dallas’ White civic leadership, specifically the Dallas Citizens Council, had recently witnessed the turmoil of the Little Rock Crisis. Therein they began to work aggressively to prevent a similar situation from occurring in the city. Thus, it was the activism of the Dallas African American populace and their threat of public and attention-worthy demonstrations that ultimately led to the demand by the court to have the schools desegregated in the fall of 1961.
Realizing the grave potential for civic unrest, the peaceful admittance of eighteen African
American children into eight all-White elementary schools was carefully planned out by members of the Dallas African American community, the local NAACP, and the business- oriented Dallas Citizens Council. A multitude of steps, rooted in violence prevention tactics, were utilized in the effort to legitimize Dallas’ perfect place in society. Overall, the initial desegregation efforts resulted in Dallas, and the nation, deeming the southwestern city as a
D. Behnken, "The 'Dallas Way': Protest, Response, and the Civil Rights Experience in Big D and Beyond," The Southwestern Historical Quarterly 111, no. 1 (2007): 11.
135 Dulaney, "Whatever Happened to the Civil Rights Movement in Dallas, Texas?" 68
“miraculous” example of successful desegregation.136 Although rattled by the image of perfection, it was evident that a precious few African American children were exemplified as
“tokens” for the outwardly-smooth desegregation process. Thus, the underlying mission of
Dallas’ White civic leadership, as it related to dismantling desegregation, was ambiguous.
Later, the strategies and proposed plans by the Dallas Citizens Council, and its offset committees, would prove to be detrimental to the African American plight in the alleviation of racism and unequal treatment. Historian Martin V. Melosi summated that,
Four years earlier [in 1957], the Citizens Council, although [selectively] blind to many racial problems, attempted to prepare the way for Dallasites to accept desegregation of the schools and integration of public places. Little attention had been given to the ‘Black’ community prior to 1954 even though ghetto and slum conditions were bad and some violence had erupted, especially in South Dallas when neighborhoods began shifting from White to ‘Black.’ But in 1957, civic and business leaders chose to face reality—legal attempts to repulse desegregation would certainly fail, and Dallas could become another Little Rock. The inability to resist the federal courts for much longer, coupled with . . . sit-ins in Dallas stimulated the Citizens Council to action. Maintenance of at least outward [emphasis mine] signs of harmony and a fear of the loss of business revenue were tangible enough reasons to seek a peaceful solution to the problem.137
As it informed the public’s opinion on desegregation, it could be reasoned that outward signs of harmony may have been inconsistent with the true feeling of the entire Dallas community. Documented by researchers William R. Carmack and Theodore Freedman was that,
“Until September 1961, Dallas, Texas, was the largest city in the South with a completely segregated school system. Quite apart from this statistic, the decision to [use tokenism to]
136 Also worth noting is the state level resolution of federal versus state rights conflict. Because the Texas Supreme Court outlawed the state statute that required the segregation of the races, in the effort to circumvent non- compliance of Brown v. Board of Education, school districts were then required to enforce federal order. Thus, one could not refer to state law per their non-compliance. Clearly summated by historian Glenn M. Linden was that, “In October 1955 the Texas Supreme Court ruled that public schools could proceed [sic] with desegregation without regard to state laws. It declared invalid those provisions of the state constitution and school laws which required racial segregation… Thus, Article 2900 of the Texas law which stated that White and ‘Negro’ children could not attend the same schools was rendered null and void." Linden, Desegregating Schools in Dallas: Four Decades in the Federal Courts, 21.
137 Melosi, "Dallas-Forth Worth: Marketing the Metroplex," 188. 69 desegregate the city’s schools was of great interest, both locally and nationally.”138
Desegregation as envisioned by the Warren Court was an ideal held by Dallas’ African American community, though rejected by its White populace.139 As the result of the dedicated work and contributions by adamant African American parents and community members, African American
Dallasites attentively witnessed the city’s initial attempt at desegregating its all-White schooling system in 1961.140
From outward perception, the City of Dallas, as a whole, including the Dallas
Independent School District’s school board was attempting to address civil rights and human rights inequalities. Yet, the journey to the first staged desegregation attempt had been a long, treacherous, and combative discourse between those whom supported the Supreme Court’s decision, those whom opposed it, and those whom attempted to be voices of reason on the behalf of honoring law and order, and as its byproduct simple justice. Nonetheless, African American
Dallasites viewed objection with resiliency. African American Dallasites redirected emotions of temporary defeat into ones that would guarantee the production of proactive pillars for racial and
138 Carmack and Freedman, "Field Reports on Desegregation in the South: Dallas, Texas," 5.
139 For instance, Dallas journalist Lynn Landrum wrote his viewpoint in the Dallas Morning News regarding his interpretation of the High Court’s decision-making process for Brown v. Board of Education. Landrum wrote, “If you read the Warren decision of 1954, you will find it to be a fact that Warren decided that what the Fourteenth Amendment was intended to mean in the year of its adoption did not control the Supreme Court of the United States. In that decision also, you will find, Warren decided that what the Supreme Court itself had set down as the law did not control the Supreme Court of the United States. ‘We can not [sic] turn the clock back to 1868, when the amendment was adopted, or even to 1896, when Plessy v. Ferguson was written.’ So Warren and associates simply turned the Constitution forward to a certain Gunnar Myrdal, a man who is nether jurist nor [sic] American citizen. . . . Stating in his opinion of 1954 that public education was one of the most important state and local functions, Warren hauls off and declares the national policy on a state and local matter without any delegation to him by anybody or any document so to do.” Lynn Landrum, "Thinking out Loud: Warren and the Law," Dallas Morning News 3 September 1958.
140Although African American Dallasites would witness the initial step toward racial desegregation in the city’s public schooling system, the all-African American school district continued to fully operate. At the time of the Bell and Border cases, African American students had to transfer out of their all-African American Dallas Independent School District in order to transfer into the all-White school district, simply to change schools. 70 social justice. To be sure, the battle to achieve absolute desegregation had hardly begun for
African American Dallasites and, thus, was a far cry from over.
Implementation of the First Dallas Independent School District (De)segregation Plan, 1961-
1970
On April 30, 1960, the [Dallas school] board, through its attorneys, filed with U.S. District Judge T. Whitfield Davidson in Dallas a ‘stair-step’ plan proposing to desegregate the first grade in September of 1961 and to encompass an additional grade each subsequent year until the twelve grades were mixed. [Under this plan, the district was to achieve the full and total dissolution of its dual schooling system by the fall of 1972]. . . . Some observers believe the board was also motivated by a supplementary opinion from the Fifth Circuit Court pointing out that, under the Texas Pupil Placement Act, the district would still have wide powers of transfer.141
Resulting from the aforementioned declaration, the January 6, 1961 final decision of the court bore the formal establishment of the Committee of 14. This committee began to craft a comprehensive measure that they hoped would assist in ensuring the successful implementation of the committee’s desegregation plan. The Committee of 14, sometimes referred to as the bi- racial committee, also began to synthesize the ways in which it could prevent potential uprising and protests. To the committee, the prospect of protest stood to possibly tarnish the image of
Dallas. To sustain violent outbursts, organized segregationist protests, and resistance demonstrations, the Committee of 14 partnered with the Dallas City Council with the goal of curtailing the free-speech rights of individuals. Documented by field reporters William R.
Carmack and Theodore Freedman, the Dallas City Council, acting as the city’s centralized legal department, aligned its viewpoint with the business leaders of the Dallas Citizens Council. To
141 Carmack and Freedman, "Field Reports on Desegregation in the South: Dallas, Texas," 7. 71 that end, on January 30, 1961, the Dallas City Council passed an “anti-mob ordinance” rule.142
The reporters specifically noted that,
The new law, which prohibited ‘standing, remaining or congregating on any public street or sidewalk, or at the entrance, alcove or steps of any public or private building . . . so as to obstruct, prevent or interfere . . . with its use,’ called for citizens to ‘disperse and move on when ordered by the police or other peace officer.’ A maximum fine of $200 for violators was specified. Proponents, including Police Chief Jesse Curry, said there was no connection between the new ordinance and recent sit-in demonstrations or future desegregation plans for the public schools. . . . [However], Dallas’ 1155 member police force began ‘mob control training’ on April 15, 1961 [while the city was experiencing sit-ins and protests at stores and restaurants in downtown Dallas. Additionally, the enactment of the anti-mob ordinance was implemented throughout the city only five months prior to the scheduled ‘desegregation day’ at eight public elementary schools in the district]. The chief stated that the training program was especially designed to teach ways of preventing disorder arising from community tensions.143
Carol Estes Thometz further noted that according to one local newspaper, the anti-mob ordinance was indeed enforced to assure the peaceful desegregation of the schools.144 Anti-mob ordinances were but one precaution the Dallas police force and Citizens Council took to ward off mass protests.
Civic leaders also took additional proactive measures to curtail the real possibility of
Dallas shamefully bearing the label that it was yet another “southern” city that could not adequately address desegregation and civil rights issues. In short, civic leaders utilized their sociopolitical and business power in the effort to minimize reputational damage. Civic leaders simply did not want Dallas proper to be known as a hateful city. As William Carmack and
Theodore Freedman summated, “strict segregationist policies were seen as bad for business.”145
142 Ibid, 20.
143 Ibid.
144 Thometz, The Decision-Makers, 68.
145 Carmack and Freedman, "Field Reports on Desegregation in the South: Dallas, Texas," 12. 72
In fact, shortly after the Dallas Independent School District initially attempted to employ the stair-step plan, Carmack and Freedman assessed the grave financial loss the city likely would have experienced had desegregation efforts been met with resistance.146 Carmack and Freedman also documented that discussions about looming financial loss saturated the discourse at Dallas
Citizens Council and Committee of 14 meetings. Effectually noted by, “. . . One prominent member of the [Dallas Citizens] Council was that some 250 national organizations refused to hold conventions in segregated cities. The estimated loss of revenue to Dallas from these conventions was placed at 50 to 100 million dollars per year,” noted Carmack and Freedman.147
Thus, in order to remedy and dismiss all aspects of potential financial losses, the Dallas Citizens
Council enlisted the aid of the media and advertisement industries. These media drives were created to address all White Dallasites in masse, especially those whom identified as segregationists.
In the months leading up to the September 6, 1961 desegregation of eight public elementary schools, the Bloom Advertising Agency, Morris Levy of the National Broadcasting
Company (NBC), Walter Cronkite of the Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS), medical doctors, psychologists, police officers, and other Dallas professionals volunteered their expertise
146 To be sure, September 7, 1961 was met with resistance and protests. Yet, as opposed to protests being reported locally or nationwide, such events were quickly halted by the actions of Dallas police officials. Four separate acts of demonstrations, heckling, and protests occurred. Field reporters William R. Carmack and Theodore Freedman reported that an effigy hung from a flagpole the day desegregation took place. The effigy was placed in front of a Dallas public school that had not been selected for initial desegregation. In addition to this, printed stickers were visibly placed on the front doors of another public school. The stickers said, “Don’t mix White and ‘Negroes.’” Finally, a nineteen year old self-identified “segregationist,” whom placed an enflamed cross in the front yard of the elementary school selected for desegregation, was apprehended by police just before a bomb threat was made on the school. Yet, the events went unpublished in local newspapers. Thus, acts of defiance were unknown to most individuals. The omission of disgruntled citizens positively assisted in the City of Dallas becoming idolized as a city that had peacefully desegregated without opposition. Following these events, peaceful public school desegregation efforts took place in the city. Ibid., 19-20.
147 Ibid. 73 to create a video that subliminally addressed “Dallas at the Crossroads.”148 Narrated by Walter
Cronkite, “Dallas at the Crossroads” captured the violent images of segregationists in Little
Rock, Arkansas. Particularly documented were those whom had gathered in active protests against the 1957 desegregation of Central High School. Throughout the multiple depictions of hate, vile words were screamed out by protesters who were tormenting the African American students who had been selected for desegregation in Little Rock. Dallas professionals narrated the film. These selected professionals employed their skills to offer assessment, per the actions taken by those fierce segregationists. Juxtaposed to such analysis, the ways in which White
Dallasites should respond to the onset of public school desegregation in the Dallas area was also eloquently addressed and rationalized. Civic leaders felt compelled to uphold the image of
Dallas, regardless of one’s own personal opinion. Consequently, the Dallas Citizens Council promoted the stances of law and order, as well as respect for civilization, through its mass distribution of “Dallas at the Crossroads.”149
Routinely mentioned throughout the twenty-two minute video was the importance for
White Dallasites to obey law and order. Further, “Dallas at the Crossroads” subliminally insinuated to residents that one should utilize the proper legal channels when questioning the validity of desegregation, rather than to take the law in one’s own hands.150 Complementary to
148 Due to modern technology, the film Dallas at the Crossroads has been made available online, free of charge. To watch the three-part Dallas at the Crossroads, please see: Sam R. Bloom, "Dallas at the Crossroads," (Dallas: Bloom Advertising Agency, 1961). http://youtu.be/ZlSRneWr7PY.
149 My use of the term “mass distribution” is quite relative. The film “Dallas at the Crossroads’ was distributed in mass throughout the city to the following entities: White residents, White civic and social clubs, White churches, and other White establishment. The film was neither distributed nor shown in mass to the African American community. Additionally, not a single African American person appeared in the film. Additionally, the word “desegregation” was rarely if ever used, however its meaning was implied throughout.
150 Dallas at the Crossroads was made by White civic leaders and was intended to be viewed by White residents of Dallas. Although Dallas at the Crossroads was widely distributed to an array of all-White organizations, the film aired on television the night before initial school desegregation efforts were implemented. 74 this, the film aimed to prevent White Dallasites from participating in acts of civil disobedience that threatened to bring harm and danger to the city. To be sure, advertising executive Sam R.
Bloom recalled the primary purpose of the film in an interview with historian William Brophy.
Bloom noted that,
A primary objective of the Dallas Citizens Council [DCC] was to avoid the type of racial crisis that had occurred in Little Rock, Arkansas, in 1957. Two of the most important people involved by the DCC in the effort to have a peaceful transition in Dallas were Chief of Police Jesse Curry and Sam R. Bloom of the Bloom Advertising Agency. Curry was asked by the DCC to study the effect of the Little Rock Crisis on that city’s police department; Bloom was asked to cover all areas not related to police activities. Of great concern to the members of the DCC was the bifurcating effect of the desegregation crisis upon the city of Little Rock.151
While “Dallas at the Crossroads” was created with the premise of curtailing openly racist behavior and actions that would foreseeably damage the city’s image, Dr. Percy Luecke, chairman of the Dallas Medical Society’s Mental Health Committee, offered another perspective.
During an oral history interview with William Brophy, Dr. Luecke denoted that,
The children of Dallas, both ‘Black’ and White, were of special concern to the city’s leaders. . . . The children were the ones who had to pay the price for adult- centered racial situations. Bloom believed that children have a difficult time coping with violence. [Thus, we were] concerned with what happens to a child who witnesses the perpetration of violence by one of his parents. Both ‘Black’ and White leaders were also concerned with the impact of racial intolerance on the minds of ‘Negro’ children. [But overall,] city leaders were also worried about the effect that extremism would have on the image of Dallas [emphasis mine]. Dick West, editorial page editor of the Dallas Morning News, told approximately two hundred top business officials in Dallas that Little Rock had lost fifteen industries because of the segregation crisis. The vice president and executive editor of the Dallas Times Herald, Felix McKnight, spoke to the same group of
However, the Dallas Citizens Council’s platform of behavior modification was so detailed that companies voluntarily supplied their employees with brochures that were filled with messages of peaceful desegregation. Such brochures and flyers were inserted into employees’ paychecks and bank statements, noted Carmack and Freedman. William R. Carmack and Theodore Freedman, "Field Reports on Desegregation in the South: Dallas, Texas," 13.
151 William Brophy interviewed Sam R. Bloom on 15 July 1978. Excerpts of Bloom’s interview are found throughout Brophy’s book chapter: Brophy, "Active Acceptance--Active Containment: The Dallas Story," 141. 75
businessmen about the need to keep Dallas from being regarded as a rebellious city. [Consequently] to avoid what had happened in Little Rock and New Orleans, leaders in Dallas decided to create a pattern of behavior conducive to peaceful change.152
Yet, as it was enunciated by Mr. Arnold Fox, a retired White male school administrator in the Dallas Independent School District, administrators were reluctant to stay in the city’s public schools due to the reality of desegregation.153 Nonetheless, in preparation for the city’s highly publicized public school desegregation effort, the Committee of 14 and the entire Dallas Citizens
Council enlisted the support of local newspaper publishers and editors. Subsequently, it was this collective group that formed a consensus as for the national narrative of Dallas. Although
African American-owned newspaper the Dallas Express continuously published information regarding civil and school rights protest demonstrations, “the [more widely distributed] press in
Dallas tacitly agreed not to cover major news stories relating to civil rights because it believed that such reporting would help create racial strife in the city. [This was especially given the looming public school desegregation implementation strategy.]”154 Thus, negative events and actions committed by White persons and segregationists likely occurred but went unpublicized.
152 Ibid.
153 During an oral history interview on the desegregation efforts of the Dallas Independent School District from the perspective of a White male school principal, Mr. Arnold Fox recalled that, “During stair-step plan, [in the] 1960s I found that it was much more compatible situation then redistricting [the entire school system] in terms of population, because upscale ‘Blacks’ were about the same socioeconomic status as Whites. We were doing it slow with all deliberate speed. . . . As a principal, I took the top percentage of ‘Blacks’ who were transferring in from KB Polk and the top percentage of Whites and it worked. The effect was there were no classrooms totally unsegregated [sic] or that sort of thing. There was not a great deal of information given out about it, except the kids did the work. I don’t recall that the ‘Black’ kids were a whole lot less academically achieving. I had about 300 kids in the school. Some of the kids had the means to use private school. The ones who thought integration was a problem, departed. [White flight began in DISD in the mid-1950s with the first desegregation case.] The rest remained. When I got one of the first six classes for emotionally disturbed kids, I left and got another job. I lost three teachers [before I left].” Additional oral Interview remarks of Mr. Arnold Fox are available at: DISD Desegregation Oral History Collection.
154 Brophy, "Active Acceptance--Active Containment: The Dallas Story," 149. 76
Therefore, on the day that the Dallas Independent School District “desegregated,” eighteen
African American children attended eight desegregated schools without documented issues.
According to Dallas historians, desegregation took place so perfectly that Life Magazine published an editorial on September 22, 1961, entitled “Our Salute to the South,” while the New
York Times also printed a full front-page story championing the work of Dallas civic leaders and the citizens of Dallas. In fact, field reporters Willam R. Carmack and Theodore Freedman contended that approximately seventy national news media and national press representatives arrived to Dallas and documented the detailed account of Dallas’ widely successful desegregation effort.155 While several newspapers documented the desegregation of the Dallas
Independent School District, Dallas Morning News journalists Bill Minutaglio and Steven L.
Davis provided a different yet detailed account of the day Dallas public schools (de)segregated.
Minutaglio and Davis recalled that day, including all of the discourse that lead up to its execution. The reporters wrote,
[Civil Rights activist and Dallas African American civic leader] Rhett James fears the worst. Today is the final, perhaps ultimate, test in Dallas: James is trying to integrate the city’s schools for the first time in its history. The preacher understands that the handful of wide-eyed children he has helped to handpick are wondering [sic]: Why are there so many White policemen, why are my parents coddling me as if they never want to let me go? As James stands outside Travis Elementary, there are at least 750 Dallas police scattered around the city . . . waiting, watching for how the city will respond. The first-graders stare up at James—they are unaware of the mad swirl of history they are making. They are in their carefully cleaned and pressed clothes, their faces scrubbed and shoes shined. Some of the little girls have bows in their hair. They look, for all the world [sic], as if they are about to go to church—as opposed to marching into the annals of history. Dallas has fought it, cleverly and then without subtlety. City leaders, from Congressman Alger to former Mayor [and Ku Klux Klansman] R. L. Thornton to the new mayor, Earle Cabell, have talked for years about the dilemma: It is the Supreme Court’s law, but it is not what anyone really wants. But the federal orders that General Walker once enforced in Arkansas have finally been too much to ignore in Dallas—the city has been drawing national attention for being more
155 Carmack and Freedman, "Field Reports on Desegregation in the South: Dallas, Texas," 23. 77
resistant to the laws of the land than even the deepest Southern cities. Finally, the White men on the Dallas Citizens Council agreed to meet a carefully coordinated group of seven ‘Black’ leaders who came bearing a proposal: Begin the integration or Dallas loses face. Begin the integration before Dr. King is invited to town. Begin the integration before Freedom Riders, Northern activists, begin occupying the city. . . . Rhett James and the others were told that Dallas would integrate its schools—but only one grade at a time. Starting with the first graders [sic]. Then, the next year, the second grade [sic]. And so on, and so on. It was, for people in ‘Black’ Dallas, quintessentially just like White Dallas . . . slow, hesitant, cautious, and with plenty of time for White residents to move the hell away from any school that had ‘Black’ children in it. It was, in the end, the only way Dallas would ever bend toward integration—it was the only palatable plan for the Dallas Citizens Council. . . . At 8:45 a.m., fifteen minutes after school opens, the Dallas superintendent makes a public announcement: All eighteen ‘Negroes’ assigned to previously White schools are inside the schools. But four children were not allowed inside classrooms. One didn’t submit a birth certificate. One had siblings in a ‘Negro’ school—and the Dallas School Board will not allow children with siblings in ‘Negro’ schools to go to White schools. Two were prevented from taking classes because ‘there was no reason for them to transfer from their school area.’ But the majority of the children are in class with White children, and they are safe. Dallas has, in its paternalistic way, done its job. James begins thinking about the next step: Is it really integration after all? Is it really equal footing and equal education? What will the children hear, what will they be forced to read? [On September 6, 1961] A handful of little ‘Black’ children have walked up the steps to Dallas’s White schools, almost seven years after the Brown v. Board of Education decision. . . . Somehow there has been no violence. But still, Dallas is going to stair-step its integration; drag it out for years and years. It is as if the city is still bound by clutching ambivalence. It is as if there is something holding Dallas back from, once and for all, condemning its worst impulses. [Is this truly desegregation?].156
The answer to Rhett James’ question regarding whether the stair-step plan effectively desegregated the city’s public schools would be evaluated for years to come. While it is noted that the Dallas Independent School District allowed eighteen African American children to seek enrollment status at all-White elementary schools, the enrollment of fourteen African American students in those schools neither eradicated nor discontinued the use of the dual schooling system. The duality of the organizational structure permitted by DISD administrators continued
156 Bill Minutaglio and Steven L. Davis, Dallas 1963 (New York: Twelve Hachette Book Group, 2013), 92- 95. 78 for several decades. Thus, historian Martin V. Melosi was correct in his assessment that while,
“Locally and nationally Dallas’s efforts at peaceful desegregation were roundly applauded . . . the absence of a major conflagration in Dallas did not imply that desegregation was an accomplished fact or that the problems of minorities had disappeared.”157 This was evident when realizing that as desegregation strategies were being implemented, only select schools were picked to become desegregated schools. Several others were left segregated. Consequently, regardless of the stair-step plan, the majority of student attendees at neighborhood schools continued to attend school with members of the same race.
Whereas the stair-step plan was implemented for less than a decade, desegregation could not be achieved because students were confined to attending one’s neighborhood schools for which one’s neighbors, many times, were of the same race as oneself.158 Resulting from this, as
Dallas Independent School District officials declared that a unitary system had been achieved, a few short years later the district faced yet another suit. This suit claimed that, on the contrary, a dual system based upon race or color continued to exist in Dallas.159 Further, following Britton v.
Folsom, historian Martin V. Melosi contended that on October 6, 1970,
157 Melosi, "Dallas-Forth Worth: Marketing the Metroplex," 189.
158 More specifically, the City of Dallas had not fully eradicated its housing ordinances. As a de jure segregated metropolitan city, residents were required to live in certain areas, based upon their race. Noted by Brian Behnken, as late as 1972, African American Dallasites made protest pilgrimages through the city in which they demanded better and more refined housing conditions. With the support of recalled Dallas Mayor J. Erik Jonsson, African American Dallasites defied the city’s slum clearance housing program. Brian Behnken, "The 'Dallas Way'": Protest, Response, and the Civil Rights Experience in Big D and Beyond; Jim Schutze, The Accommodation: The Politics of Race in an American City.
159 According to the “Court History of the Desegregation Suits Involving DISD” as retrieved from Judge William M. Taylor’s personal notes surrounding Tasby, “Britton v. Folsom unsuccessfully sought in the district court to accelerate desegregation under the stair-step plan. It was appealed: the court remanded the case to the district court and issued a mandate that the plan be revised to require desegregation of grade twelve in 1965 (Britton v. Folsom, 348 F.2d 158, July 2, 1965). District Judge Davidson interpreted the order as a suggestion, however, and refused to order DISD to desegregate the 12th grade. On 1 September 1965, the appeals court repeated their order concerning the twelfth grade. (Britton v. Folsom, 350 F.2d 1022).” Jarol E. Krause, "Appendix V: Court History of 79
A suit filed in the [United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas: Dallas Division] charged that a dual system was being maintained through neighborhood school assignment plans, school building sites, and staffing practices. In July 1971, Federal Judge William Taylor declared that elements of a dual system remained; Dallas Independent School District (DISD) had seventy schools with 90 percent or more White students, forty with 90 percent or more ‘Black’ students, and forty-nine with 90 percent or more [‘Black’ and Chicano] minority students. The jurist again instructed the district to eliminate the dual system. 160
Filed nine years after the Dallas Independent School District’s faced its initial desegregation plan, Civil Action No. CA-3-4211-C was petitioned as a measure to request that the southwestern district be forced to dissolve of its dual schooling system once and for all.161
This occurred a staggering seventeen years after the landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision. With this filing, the forty-three year litigated case of Tasby v. Estes was born.
Tasby v. Estes, 1970-1976
The continued operation of one-race schools remained daunting and discouraging for
African American Dallasites. To be sure, Karen Elliott, newspaper journalist for the Dallas
Express noted on September 27, 1970 that,
Nine years after the Dallas Independent School District was first ordered to desegregate, 82 per cent of the city’s ‘Negro’ students still attend schools that are 95 per cent ‘Black,’ according to Health, Education and Welfare figures. . . . The Dallas school board was first taken to court in 1961 by a private citizen. Thurgood Marshall, now a justice on the U.S. Supreme Court, represented the NAACP in that suit against the board. The federal district court in Dallas ordered stair-step integration—integrate one grade each year producing total integration in 1972- 1973 school year. After the 1964 Civil Rights Act was passed, Marshall again the Desegregation Suits Involving DISD," (Dallas: Obtained from the personal notes of Judge William M. Taylor, Tasby collection is available at the Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law Underwood Law Library, Litigation Archives Division, 1976), box 2-file 1, 159.
160 Martin V. Melosi, "Dallas-Forth Worth: Marketing the Metroplex," 6 October 1970 was the original case filing date of Eddie M. Tasby et al. v. Estes et al.,(1970-2003). The case filing document is available for view by researchers in the archive at Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, litigation archives division.
161 Civil Action filing in the matter of Eddie M. Tasby et al. v. Estes et al. 80
represented the NAACP in a suit against the board that resulted in stepped up integration. The federal district court refused to carry out a Fifth Circuit order to integrate the twelfth grade in all high schools in 1965 and the Fifth Circuit Court itself issued the order on Sept. 1, 1965, just as Dallas schools opened. Despite the court’s order to integrate the twelfth grade in all high schools in 1965, two all- ‘Black’ high schools, one all-‘Black’ junior high and six all-‘Black’ elementary schools remain.162
Adding to this viewpoint, several other civil rights leaders grew concerned regarding whether the Citizens Council had the best interest of African American students at heart. Additionally, several African American leaders questioned how the Dallas Citizens Council would go about encouraging the uniform act of desegregation, rather than supporting a similar strategy like the conservative and slow stair-step plan. In general, several community members remained perplexed as to the role the court, the Citizens Council, and other powerful entities would assume as it affected school rights. Juxtaposed to these inquiries, many segregationists continued to speak out by voicing their opposition against the possible dissolution of the Dallas Independent
School District’s dual schooling operational system.
On October 6, 1970, Sam Tasby, Ludie and Cobbin Lafayette, Thelma Lee Crouch,
Bettye Jackson, Richard Medrano, and a host of other African American and Mexican-American parents filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Texas, Dallas Division against the Dallas Independent School District. This suit, Tasby v. Estes, was filed on behalf of the children and those similarly situated, for the infringement of educating all Dallas public school students in a unitary schooling system. The students, for which the case was filed, were subjected to attending majority-minority schools, rather than the school that was nearest them. Therefore, prior to the legal representation of the NAACP’s Legal Defense and
Education Fund, the plaintiffs sought out the services of both the Dallas Legal Services Project
162 Karen Elliott, "Dallas May Face Suit: Progress on School Integration Questioned," Dallas Express 27 September 1970. 81 and Mexican-American Legal Defense Educational Fund, respectively. To effectively represent the joint filers, both legal aid organizations served as counsel for the plaintiffs.
Initially, the plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction against current and future school construction. This was done to prevent the continuance of schooling segregation. Additionally, the petitioners wished to prevent the future use of neighborhood school assignments for student placement, since the city was racially segregated per housing ordinances. The plaintiff’s main concern and filing issue was enunciated in the claim’s prayer for relief. More simply stated, the plaintiff’s requested that the desegregation implementation tool used for the dissolution of dual schooling organizational facilities in Dallas be met with a more equal and appropriate evaluation measure in order to impartially desegregate the district’s public schools.163 Specifically noted on
October 30, 1970, in the “Civil Docket” for Tasby v. Estes was that,
[The plaintiffs wished to enter into a class action suit and] allege violation of civil rights by [the Dallas Independent School District for] operating a racially, ethnically and economically segregated school system. [The plaintiffs therefore] seek injunctive relief for racial balance between three ethnic groups—‘Black,’ Chicano, & White together with costs and attorney fees.164
Therein, the Tasby v. Estes suit was unlike any other formerly filed desegregation case in Dallas
Independent School District history. This was primarily because Tasby wished to effectually eradicate segregated schooling spaces for both African American and Mexican-American pupils.
Upon receiving the motion, Judge William M. Taylor denied the request to halt building construction. However, Judge Taylor partially vacated the judgment when he remanded the issue back to the lower court to more thoroughly assess whether the Dallas Independent School
163 Jarol E. Krause, "Appendix V: Court History of the Desegregation Suits Involving DISD."
164 William M. Taylor Jr., "Civil Docket," in Tasby et al. v. Estes et al. , ed. United States District Court (Dallas: United States District Court, 30 October 1970). 82
District was meeting desegregation compliance. On July 12, 1971, the first court proceeding for
Tasby v. Estes was heard.
Four days later on July 16, 1971, Judge William M. Taylor delivered an all-encompassing
“Memorandum Opinion.”165 Judge Taylor’s opinion touched on the possible implementation of the “confluence of cultures.” To him, the confluence of cultures would occur namely through the use of racial-based television programming for view inside classrooms. Additionally, Judge
Taylor’s opinion highlighted the ways in which the Texas Education Agency had been wrongfully and unabashedly ridiculed for the failure of certain school districts to meet compliance. Juxtaposed to this, Judge Taylor’s opinion validated the pressing need to convert the
Dallas Independent School District into a fair and equal organization.166 Filed by Clerk Joseph
McElroy, Jr., in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas
Division, United States District Judge William M. Taylor wrote that,
165 Ordered nearly three months after the 20 April 1971 Supreme Court decision of Swann v. Charlotte- Mecklenburg, United States District Judge William M. Taylor disregarded the possibility of busing as a legal remedy for the Dallas Independent School District. The unanimous affirmation by the United States Supreme Court to proclaim busing a permissible remedy was widely used in multiple regions of the country, including the South and Southwest. However, Judge Taylor opposed “busing for racial mixing,” as an adequate measure to address the problem of systemic racism vis-à-vis school segregation and housing ordinances. According to the Memo from Chief Justice Burger to the Court, as summated by Gregory S. Jacobs, “With Swann and student busing, the school issue became a national one, because busing was meant to remedy a peculiarly southern obstruction but to overcome the chief problem of the urban metropolis: racially separate patterns of housing.” Gregory S. Jacobs, Getting around Brown: Desegregation, Development, and the Columbus Public Schools (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1998), 33.
166 The Texas Education Agency [TEA] and its subsidiary task force, TEDTAC, were not warmly received by Texans, especially Dallasites. According to the legal background of United States v. State of Texas, “Before the Civil Rights Act, implementation of desegregation had been approached piecemeal through the courts; now the influence of the executive bureaucracy would also be brought to bear. . . . [More specifically], by the mid-1960s, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, an increasing volume of litigation, and enforcement efforts by the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare [HEW,] increased the pace of desegregation in Texas schools. This in turn led the Agency to take a more active role. Title IV of the Civil Rights Act provided for states to render technical assistance to desegregating school districts, and when federal appropriations were made available in 1967, the State Board of Education requested and received federal funding for an Office of Technical Assistance (OTA) within TEA. TEDTAC Project, "School Desegregation in Texas: The Implementation of United States v. State of Texas," 2-15. 83
It is difficult to believe in this day and time that anyone anywhere would be surprised, shocked or amazed at this case or at the pendency of this law suit . . . . On May 17, 1954, the Supreme Court of the United States, in Brown v. Board of Education, said, ‘In the field of public education the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. . . . In 1955 the Supreme Court handed down its opinion in Brown #2 ordering desegregation of schools with ‘deliberate speed.’ In the 16 years since Brown #2 little progress had been made and the Courts were confronted with actions by School Boards that used every device imaginable to evade and avoid their responsibilities in this regard. In 1968 the Supreme Court in, Green vs. County School Board, pointed out this lack of progress and required that ‘the burden on a school board today is to come forward with a plan that promises realistically to work . . . now . . . until it is clear that state imposed segregation has been completely removed. Green vs. County School Board, 391 U.S. 430. . . . When it appears as it clearly does from the evidence in this case that in the Dallas Independent School District 70 schools are 90% or more White (Anglo), 40 schools are 90% or more ‘Black,’ and 49 schools with 90% or more minority [‘Black’ and Mexican-American], 91% of ‘Black’ students in 90% or more of the minority schools, 3% of the ‘Black’ students attend schools in which the majority is White or Anglo, it would be less than honest for me to say or to hold that all vestiges of a dual system have been eliminated in the Dallas Independent School District, and I find and hold that elements of a dual system still remain. . . . The Dallas School Board has failed to implement any . . . tool or to even suggest that it would consider [desegregation] plans until long after the filing of this suit and in part after the commencement of this trial. There is another question which this Court must decide and that has to do with the complaint of those plaintiffs who brought suit as Mexican-Americans in behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated. It is my opinion and I so hold that Mexican-Americans constitute a clearly separate and clearly identifiable ethnic group. No one ever had any doubt about Lee Trevino’s ethnic origin and this is true of many many others. But as we said by Judge Jack Roberts of the Federal Court in Austin, ‘But the mere existence of an ethnic group, regardless of its racial origin, and standing alone, does not establish a case integrating it with the remainder of the school population. Rather, the plaintiff must show that there has been some form of de jure segregation against the ethnic minority’ [emphasis mine]. And I find that the plaintiff Mexican-Americans have failed in maintaining the burden of proof. . . . In this connection, I would advise that I will appoint reverend Zan Holmes, Rene Martinez, and Attorney David Kendall on this [desegregation] committee, if they are willing to serve. I have heretofore indicated during this trial that I would call upon the Board of the Dallas Independent School District for its plan to eliminate segregation in its school district and that I would expect that done now. . . . Therefore, I direct that the Dallas Independent School District Board file with this Court its plan for the establishment of a unity school system by 10:00 A.M. next Friday, July 23, 1971. . . . I would suggest that the Dallas Board of Education could make the ‘confluence of cultures’ an actuality rather than a catch-phrase or 84
a dream and that it could be of vast help to the City of Dallas in deserving its Chamber of Commerce appellation of ‘City of Excellence.’167
With Judge Taylor’s July 16, 1971 order, he allowed for the racially-inclusive Dallas Alliance to form.168
On August 2, 1971, the initial judgment of the court was ordered by Judge William M.
Taylor. The order mandated that White students be exposed to minority students, and minority students exposed to White students, through the means of television programming. This plan was deemed the “confluence of cultures.”169 Rather than implement a plan that called for the physical
167 William M. Taylor Jr., "Tasby et al. vs. Estes et al. Memorandum Opinion," in CA 3-4211-C, ed. Dallas Division In The United States District Court For the Northern District of Texas (Dallas: William M. Taylor, 16 July 1971).
168 Though Judge Taylor’s 1971 order called for a tri-ethnic committee, the Dallas Alliance did not physically come into being until 1974. Additionally, although the Dallas Alliance was established by the court as a tri-ethnic committee to equally represent the African American, White, and Mexican-American city populace, Mexican-Americans failed the burden of proof standard as defined by the court. Historically, Texas Mexicans, or Tejanos, were discriminated against in the housing, schooling, and political sectors. Similar to African American Dallasites, Mexican-Americans were confined to certain enclaves and barrios. Specifically, a large Tejano populace has historically occupied the Jefferson Boulevard area of the incorporated Oak Cliff division of Dallas, Texas. However, unlike African American Dallasites, Mexican-Americans were subjected to de facto segregation. To be exact, Mexican-Americans were never legally prohibited from enjoying the full range of opportunities and amenities that White Dallasites enjoyed. The segregation of Mexican-Americans was by custom, not by law. Thus, Judge Taylor ruled correctly in that, although Mexican-Americans clearly deserved to be statistically categorized per their ethnicity as opposed to being labeled as “other Whites,” Mexican-American Dallasites could not prove that they were being legally segregated against. This was simply because their oppression occurred by custom and tradition rather than the force of law.
169 Mentioned in his “Memorandum Opinion,” Judge William M. Taylor advocated for the confluence of cultures vis-à-vis intangible interaction. This was done to prevent demanding that students physically interact with one another. Judge Taylor specifically opposed school busing, although such method would later be undertaken per the desegregation plan as brought forward by the Dallas Alliance. In fact, during his statement of opinion on July 16, 1971, Judge Taylor contended, “Now all of this is not as grim as it sounds. I am opposed to and do not believe in massive cross-town busing of students for the sole purpose of mixing bodies. I doubt that there is a Federal judge anywhere that would advocate that type of integration as distinguished from desegregation. There are many many [sic] other tools at the command of the School Board and I would direct its attention to part of one of the plans suggested by Texas Educational Desegregation Technical Assistance Center [TEDTAC] which proposed the use of television in the elementary grades and the transfer of classes on occasion by bus during school hours in order to enable the different ethnic groups to communicate. How better could lines of communication [sic] be established than by saying, ‘I saw you on TV yesterday,’ and, besides that, television is much cheaper than busing and a lot faster and safer [sic]. This is in no sense a Court order but is merely something that the Board might consider.” 85 desegregation of its schools, Judge Taylor agreed with other Texans whom reasoned that students should not carry the burden of segregation. Consequently, advocates of the “confluence of cultures” reasoned that student should not be bused across town when they could, instead, become knowledgeable about differing ethnicities, races, and cultures through the mere observation of television programming. Although this Judgment was ordered on August 2, 1971, the plan was never implemented by the school district. Subsequently, another desegregation plan was filed in September 1971.
Crafted by the Texas Educational Desegregation Technical Assistance Center [TEDTAC] and later endorsed by the Dallas Alliance, the “Order with Regard to Majority-to-Minority
Transfer Policy,” was requested before presiding Judge William M. Taylor. In the order, the
Dallas Alliance specified the need to implement a desegregation plan that would bring about the desegregation of schools for all ethnicities involved, including the African American, White, and
Mexican-American populace. Recounted verbatim, their order stated that,
The majority-to-minority transfer policy was first conceived by the courts for bi- racial situations. . . . In a tri-ethnic context, the purpose of a voluntary transfer policy is to encourage, foster, and help to maintain tri-ethnic student bodies. In the Dallas Independent School District –a tri-ethnic district which has many ‘Anglo’ students (approximately 59%) and many ‘Black’ students (approximately 33%), but a relatively small number of Mexican-American students (approximately 8%) – the court is convinced, after consulting with the Tri-Ethnic Committee, that the following transfer policy is best suited to achieve the goal of tri-ethnic student bodies, and accordingly it is hereby ordered that the following policy be implemented immediately: (1) Any ‘Black’ student who is enrolled in a school in which ‘Black’ students outnumber ‘Anglo’ students shall be permitted to transfer
Taylor Jr., "Tasby et al. vs. Estes et al. Memorandum Opinion." The “Judgment” document that ordered ethnic- based television programming to be made available in elementary classrooms throughout the DISD is located in Box 6, File 6 in the litigation files of Tasby v. Estes. These are housed at Southern Methodist University. "Tasby et al. vs. Estes et al. Judgment," in CA 3-4211-C, ed. Dallas Division United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Dallas: SMU Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, Litigation Archives Division, 2 August 1971).For general information on the ways in which Judge Taylor assessed the use of the TEDTAC plan in other large Texas cities, please see: Anna Victoria Wilson and William E. Segall, Oh, Do I Remember!: Experiences of Teachers During the Desegregation of Austin's Schools, 1964-1971 (Albany: State University of New York, 2001). 86
to any school in which ‘Anglo’ students outnumber ‘Black’ students. (2) Any ‘Anglo’ student who is enrolled in a school in which ‘Anglo’ students outnumber ‘Black’ students shall be permitted to transfer to any school in which ‘Black’ students outnumber ‘Anglo’ students. (3) Any Mexican-American student who is enrolled in a school in which the proportion of Mexican-American students is greater than the proportion of Mexican-American students in the school district as a whole shall be permitted to transfer to any school in which the proportion of Mexican-American students in the school district as a whole.170
To suffice the projected number of students looking to transfer to various schools in order for the school district to meet compliance, the desegregation tactic of busing was implemented en masse.
In fact, several segregationists became so disillusioned with the African American
Dallasites who pressured the Fifth Circuit Federal Court to honor the federal ruling as demanded under Brown and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that several White Dallasites began moving away from the inner City of Dallas.171 Many of those whom fled the city did so in search of southern comfort and Whites-only neighborhoods.
Yet contrary to popular belief, the Dallas Alliance Education Task Force, also affectionately referred to as the Tri-Ethnic Committee, was actually charged with the responsibility of crafting a comprehensive Community Education Plan to therein dispel the authority of the Dallas Citizens Council. The Dallas Alliance shared responsibility in
170 William M. Taylor Jr., "Order with Regard to Majority-to-Minority Transfer Policy " in CA 3-4211-C, ed. Dallas Division United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Dallas: SMU Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law library, Litigations Archive Division, September 1971).
171 In fact, noted by Dallas Independent School District researchers during the Tasby v. Estes proceedings, a significant student demographical change occurred per the district’s court order and continued bout of litigation. Specifically noted was the overall drop in student population. According to statistics, DISD endured a thirty-one percent decline of student enrollment, from 1961- 1969. Further, the White student population in DISD declined by eight percent over the 1968-1969 year, while the African American and Chicano student population significantly increased, respectively. To be certain, the Chicano student population increased over fifty-one percent within a few years. Statistical information, including demographical transformation, is available for view via charts, tables and graphs in the Tasby archive at SMU Dedman School of Law. This information can be found in File 17, Box 4. Eddie M. Tasby et al. Estes et al. 87 transforming the Dallas Independent School District. In its May 1976 magazine issue of Texas
Monthly, journalist Richard West stated that,
All in all, it was a virtuoso performance by the city’s business leaders and on the surface it was almost conclusive proof that the Establishment [Dallas Citizens Council monotony] was indeed, in spite of constant rumors to the contrary, not dead. Almost, but not quite [sic]. The truly significant thing about the new Dallas desegregation plan was that it signaled the birth of a new Establishment. The Citizens Council, which had midwife the 1961 plan, was effectively bypassed in 1976. Instead, a new group, the Dallas Alliance, came up with the plan. The Alliance desegregation task force contained crucial one-line figures like Presley and Culliam and Jack Lowe (who worked on as chairman despite heart troubles), but it also reached deep into the ‘Black’ and Brown communities; it’s 21 members were divided among seven Whites, six ‘Blacks,’ seven Mexican- Americans, and one American-Indian. And the plan, while containing many serious potential pitfalls, is based on support from all three racial communities, and not, as in 1961, simply from the downtown businessmen. This concerted political effort signals a maturity in Dallas civic leadership that few communities can boast. The Alliance was founded as a tri-ethnic civic group by the [Dallas] Chamber of Commerce, including some gifts from the Hoblitzelle and Zale foundations. Once launched, however, the organization sailed off on its own. From the beginning it was clear that the issues facing Dallas were far more complicated than simple desegregation. Since U.S. District Judge William M. Taylor’s original 1971 desegregation order, Dallas has had three separate racial groups to balance: ‘Blacks,’ Mexican-American, and White. . . .172
Just as Judge William M. Taylor requested the voluntary services of the Dallas Alliance, the path to achieving a more desegregated and uniform school district became more progressive and racially inclusive. However, the effect of Dallas’ public school desegregation efforts had on the city later proved to be all-encompassing of meeting desegregation requirements, while also contrarily contributing to the birth of social conditioning and isolation measures. The desegregation efforts of the Dallas Independent School District substantiated student and parental freedom of choice for those whom were unenthused about desegregation. More clearly, just as Federal Judge William M. Taylor pondered how to enforce desegregation without promoting the absolute integration of the school district and its students, the federal
172 Richard West, "The Texas Monthly Reporter," Texas Monthly Magazine (May 1976): 17-18. 88 desegregation order by the court indeed unconsciously promoted and led to the mass exodus of
White Dallasites from the City of Dallas proper. The (de)segregation of the Dallas Independent
School District simultaneously ran counterproductive to the redistribution of race in and around the city, according to physical space.
To summate, although the Tasby v. Estes case led to the desegregation of the Dallas
Independent School District, the school district, the inner-city, and Dallas’ neighboring suburban communities underwent a racial demographic transformation. The inner-city of Dallas rapidly became a majority-minority enclave. In contrast, however, several of the northern suburban communities became staunchly conservative and majority-majority establishments. This was
(de)segregation.
Tasby’s Aftermath
While Swann vs. Charlotte-Mecklenburg has been credited with having birthed the massive surge of public school student busing, Gregory S. Jacobs reminded us that the genesis of the desegregation tactic of busing could actually be found in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.173
Explicitly contended by Jacobs was that,
173 Further, native Dallasite, Mrs. E. E. Weyrick, who was in fierce opposition to Judge Taylor’s order for student busing, inquired with the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) herself about the depths to which the Civil Rights Act of 1964 affected public school law. On September 18, 1975, the Elementary and Secondary Division: Office for Civil Rights within the HEW Department responded. Operations Branch Chief, Frederick T. Cioffi, replied by stating that, “The Office for Civil Rights is responsible for enforcing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination in federally-funded programs on the basis of race, color, or national origin. This is in accord with the 1954 Supreme Court decision Brown v. Board of Education which outlawed dual, segregated schools. The courts and the Department have consistently held that school systems are obliged to use various school assignment plans in order to establish a unitary non-racial school system. Further, the maintenance of dual school systems in which students are assigned to schools on the basis of race, color, or national origin denies to those students the equal protection of the law guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. Therefore, for the purpose of abolishing dual school systems and eliminating the vestiges thereof, many local educational agencies have been required to reorganize their school systems, to reassign students, and to engage in the transportation of students. The decision has been made in many school districts across the country to include transportation of students in plans for the elimination of dual school structures in order to provide equal opportunities to all children in these systems. Court-ordered desegregation plans involving the transportation of 89
Title VI of the Act charged the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) with the responsibility of drawing up guidelines to ensure obedience to desegregation mandates, permitting HEW to deny federal funds if a school district failed to comply. HEW’s initial set of guidelines permitted school districts to adopt ‘freedom of choice’ plans that allowed African Americans to transfer voluntarily to all-White schools and vice versa. . . . By 1968, stricter HEW guidelines, a strengthened Title VI, and a series of appellate court decisions tightened the noose around such plans, charging southern districts for the first time with the responsibility of actively integrating.174
Although cross-town busing had been unanimously endorsed by the Supreme Court of the
United States in Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg, the busing of students in Dallas was met with fierce opposition in both the African American and White communities, respectively.175 For
students, such as that in your school district, will continue to be accepted by the Department as meeting the remedial requirements necessary to achieve compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Moreover, court decisions relating to pupil transportation and desegregation will, consistent with congressionally enacted restrictions, be followed in carrying out our Title VI responsibility.” Federick T. Cioffi, 18 September 1975.
174 Gregory S. Jacobs, Getting around Brown: Desegregation, Development, and the Columbus Public Schools, 27. For general reading on the “freedom of choice” plan as enacted during the Brown v. Board of Education era, please see: Sean F. Reardon et al., "Brown Fades: The End of Court-Ordered School Desegregation and the Resegregation of American Public Schools," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 31, no. 4 (2011); Gary Orfield and Susan E. Eaton, Dismantling Desegregation: The Quiet Reversal of Brown v. Board of Education (New York: The New Press, 1996); Frank T. Read, "Judicial Evolution of the Law of School Integration since Brown v. Board of Education," Law and Contemporary Problems 39, no. 1 (1975); Stephen C. Halpern, On the Limits of the Law: The Ironic Legacy of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995).
175 Argued on 12 October 1970, and decided 20 April 1971, Swann et al. vs. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education et al. was the landmark public school education case that established mass transit busing as an appropriate measure to effectually desegregate schools. Noted in the case’s syllabus, as obtained from Judge Taylor’s files, were the multiple aims of the case. Of the eight pillars denoted, two of those aims directly correlated to Dallas’ own Tasby v. Estes proceedings. Specifically, the Swann syllabus specified the need of the Court and the school district to address the elimination of state-imposed segregation in the public schools that was held violative [sic] of equal protection guarantees by Brown vs. Board of Education. Additionally, the Supreme Court of the United States also established that the, “Policy and practice with regard to faculty, staff, transportation, extracurricular activities, and facilities are among are among the most important indicia of a segregated system, and the first remedial responsibility of school authorities is to eliminate invidious racial distinctions in those respects.” Further, when assessing the ways in which Chief Justice Warren E. Burger rationed the unjust perpetuation of one- race schools, Judge Taylor denoted the similarities between Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina, and Dallas, Texas. To be sure, Judge Taylor made note that, “In addition to finding certain actions of the school board to be discriminatory, the [Court of Appeals] also found that residential patterns in the city and county resulted in part from federal, state, and local government action other than school board decisions. School board action based on these patterns resulted in segregated education. For example, locating schools in Negro residential areas and fixing the size of the schools to accommodate the needs of immediate neighborhoods were but one form of continued 90 instance, some White Dallasites wrote Judge Taylor to urge him to consider the public transfer of
African American school teachers to majority White schools, rather than having White students bused to majority African American schools.176 Many of these parental letters were written to provide an alternative to busing children. For instance, a portion of the September 20, 1975 letter addressed to Judge William M. Taylor, Jr., from Dallasite W. H. Conkle read,
Honorable Sir: What do you think of integrating the school board and school teachers instead of school children? If there were just as many ‘Blacks’ & ‘Chicanos,’ as ‘Anglos’ on the School Board [sic]. Just as many qualified teachers, be they ‘Anglos,’ ‘Blacks,’ or ‘Chicanos’ in one school as the others, so that a school child could get just as good an education in any school it makes no difference what school they go to. Of course there should be just as many ‘Anglo’ teachers as ‘Blacks’ or ‘Chicanos’ in all the schools. Why would it be necessary to bus children from one part of the county to the other?. . . . The teachers should be assigned to the various schools regardless of their color. For instance, South Oak Cliff, or Lincoln [High School], or Pinkston [High School], should have as many ‘Anglos,’ ‘Chicanos,’ or ‘Black’ qualified teachers as Sunset [High School], or Lake Highlands [High School] or North Dallas [High School] according to their enrollment. . . . Busing school children is not only expensive, it is dangerous. [With this plan], our schools would then be for the People; all the people. If we can get every citizen in this city, in this county, in this state, in these oppression. Finally, the assessment by the unanimous Court that busing was an effective measure to achieve a unitary and desegregated school system was emphasized in the personal annotations of United States District Court Judge William M. Taylor. Specifically, Judge Taylor assessed the Courts rationale that “An optional majority-to- minority transfer provision has long been recognized as a useful part of every desegregation plan. Provision for optional transfer of those in the majority racial group of a particular school to other schools where they will be in the minority is an indispensable remedy for those students willing to transfer to other schools in order to lessen the impact on them of the state-imposed stigma of segregation. In order to be effective, such a transfer arrangement must grant the transferring student free transportation and space must be made available in the school in which he desires to move. [Emphasis was denoted by Judge William M. Taylor]. To read the entire syllabus of Swann et al. vs. Charlotte-Mecklenburg et al. through the eyes of District Court Judge William M. Taylor, please see: Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, "Annoted Syllabus of Swann et al. vs. Charlotte-Mecklenburg et al., Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit by Tasby v. Estes Presiding Judge William M. Taylor," ed. Supreme Court of the United States (Dallas: SMU Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, Litigation Archives Division 20 April 1971).
176 Indeed, several Dallasites vetted Judge Taylor to consider the transport of minority schoolteachers into all-White schools. Having ordained the use of busing in Dallas during his judging tenure, Judge Taylor received numerous letters from concerned citizens. He saved many of these letters. In addition to those, Judge Taylor saved all newspaper clippings sent to him with special notes against busing. These have all been archived, along with his personal notes, at the Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, Litigation Archives Division. 91
United States to feel that because he pays his taxes and meets his obligations, and because of his loyalty he is entitled to feel that he is just as important to be free to enjoy the freedom of all facilities allowed to any group be he White, ‘Black’ or any color. This is truly a country for all the people. I am sure we can achieve this objective through education.177
Additionally, several other White Dallasites were uncomfortable with the potentiality of
White students being bused into majority African American neighborhoods. Many times, White opponents of majority-to-minority transfer policies reluctantly advocated for the implementation of racial minority-to-majority busing instead. White Dallasites preferred for African American students to bear the responsibility of busing, if such a measure had to be taken. White Dallasites wished to circumvent the unforeseen yet also unrealistic possibility of personal harm done to
White students in predominately African American schools. The assumption that African
American residents would cause harm, danger, or immorality to White students was both unfathomable and stereotypical. Yet, Judge Taylor received a wealth of letters arguing this viewpoint. One such letter was submitted by Mrs. Danny Faulk. Mrs. Faulk’s September 18,
1975 letter contended that,
If God had intended us all to be the same [sic], He would have made us that way. We can never be the same because of our backgrounds many years ago. I am very concerned for my children’s safety as well as education. My husband and I strive to see they have a good Christian home, a good education and church background. Please don’t let this be taken away from us. Quality education is a must. I urge you to find a way to put an end to forced busing.178
Further, outspoken Dallasites including Edward B. Kelley also vehemently opposed the desegregation tactic of forced busing. Kelley feared that the strategy would promote the racial and socioeconomic redistribution of residents outside of city limits. Additionally, Mr. Kelley and several others believed that the concept of busing would threaten and weaken the business and
177 W. H. Conkle, 20 September 1975.
178 Mrs. Danny Faulk, 18 September 1975. 92 residential value of the city. In his December 6, 1971 letter addressed to the United States Fifth
Circuit Court of Appeals, Mr. Kelley purposely noted that,
Fifteen or twenty years ago, people would have considered it complete incomprehensible if told that their children could not go to school in their own neighborhood, but would be bused across town. By the same token, I find it incomprehensible that, fifteen or twenty years from now, when my three month old daughter is grown, a federal judge will tell her who she can marry, how many children she can have and the sex of each based upon a computer allocation, what section of town her family can live in, what religion they can be, etc. all based upon racial allocations. Is this any more incomprehensible today than busing was fifteen or twenty years ago? Does all this sound like we are moving toward a bureaucratic totalitarianism [sic]? I find this a bit frightening. Being a professional real estate appraiser, I have watched very carefully the mood of uncertainty in my immediate neighborhood and all over the city. There are many more ‘for sale’ signs today than there were even a few months ago and, from talking with leading realtors, I learn that for every ‘for sale’ sign there are approximately two more listings where people do not want a sign in their yard [emphasis mine]. These people are moving to the counties around Dallas, i.e., Ellis, Collin, Rockwall, Kaufman, etc. Real estate values are rapidly moving up in these counties. . . . Gentlemen, [in Dallas] education of children is not the endpoint here but rather the physical mingling of the races. It appears that our democratic pressures have disappeared when 76% of the population, ‘Blacks’ and Whites included, is opposed to busing. Of the 24% unaccounted for, few were in favor of busing but were undecided on the issue [of desegregation]. EVEN THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES HAS SAID THAT HE IS AGAINST BUSING. Yet we are facing an ever accelerated pace toward the very thing that the majority are against. This does not equate to democratic processes. . . . IT IS TIME THAT THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE AGAIN BE HEARD AND THAT COMMON SENSE BE USED IN THE MATTER OF DESEGREGATION, AS IN EVERYTHING.179
Overall, the majority of White Dallasites were against all forms of busing.180
179 Edward B. Kelley, 6 December 1971.
180 Another letter received by Judge Taylor, from Mr. and Mrs. Donald W. Cargile, also denoted that the forced busing of children would lead to White flight. These are merely examples of the correspondence received by Judge William M. Taylor by concerned Dallasites. Further, the Dallas Morning News and Dallas Times Herald, respectively, published several articles on Dallas school desegregation orders, busing, and the affect such orders had on White flight. For the letter submitted by the Cargile’s, please see Judge Taylor’s personal letters at the SMU Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, Litigations Archive Division. Donald and Mary Cargile, 18 September 1975. 93
Ironically, whereas White Dallasites passionately opposed busing as a plausible desegregation measure, so too did African American Dallasites. African American Dallasites who fiercely opposed student busing did so but without the same sentiment of White Dallasites.
To be sure, while demanding equality of access as under Brown and Tasby, African American
Dallasites foresaw yet another layer of oppression on African American students. This was because many feared that African American’s would again bear the burden of racially insensitive practices. However, a consensus as for the emotion African American Dallasites felt toward, or in opposition to, busing continued to vary.
For example, while some African American Dallasites were jubilant after hearing the
Brown v. Board of Education decision of 1954, and the federal mandate in Dallas’ own Tasby v.
Estes proceedings, others were keenly aware as to the ill-placed burden busing would have on
African American children. Douglas Scott, an African American school teacher for the Dallas
Independent School District, penned a busing opposition letter to Judge William Taylor. On
September 19, 1975, Scott reasoned that,
I brought my children with me to this school when I came five years ago. I am concerned deeply as to what will happen to my children if I [or they] are uprooted and sent to another school. I have this year enrolled my niece in the W. T. White High School. She has become a part of that school and its activities. Many of my former students have made her feel at home and have made her a part of their lives. What will happen to her if [she] must be moved?181
Overwhelmingly, many African American Dallasites felt a sense of hesitancy as it related to the possible detriment forced busing would have on African American children. In addition to
African American parents and community members drafting letters to the Judge, several civically-inclined African American Dallasites chose to attend public Dallas Alliance meetings, wherein they publicly voiced their apprehension regarding the district’s use of busing. For
181 Douglas Scott, 19 September 1975. 94 instance, in January 1976 an unidentified African American woman attended a Dallas Alliance meeting. During this meeting she stated that,
. . . I am not going to accept, and I am not wanting to accept that [all the students who are going to be bused are ‘Black’]. I think that it is wrong of us to sit by and say, ‘Well, if is all of our ‘Black’ kids who are going to be bused, I am for it.’ If a judge makes that kind of decision, I am willing to get out and knock on doors and say, ‘Let us ‘Black’ people widely organize if it is just going to be our children.’ Our children are being bused into White utopia! . . . . I cannot just accept, just like that, anymore the feeling of White entitlement [sic].182
Juxtaposed to the African American and White discourse surrounding court-ordered busing, the Mexican-American community was also perplexed about their position in the school district’s desegregation plans.183 Like African American Dallasites, some Mexican-American
Dallasites attended open Dallas Alliance meetings. However, unlike African American
Dallasites, some Mexican-American Dallasites felt that their concerns were wholly ignored. For example, during the January 1976 public Dallas Alliance meeting, Mr. Victor Bonita made very pointed remarks as he enunciated his perspective as a Mexican-American residing in Dallas. Mr.
Bonita said that,
182 The audio tapes archived at Dallas’ Southern Methodist University’s Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, Litigations Archive Division are labeled as “Tri-Ethnic Committee” or “TEC” meetings. All tapes are labeled with corresponding dates of meetings. However, the names of members in attendance at the meetings were not disclosed. Thus, it was a challenge to analyze audio data because several of the individual voices were unidentifiable, except that of Judge William M. Taylor. Judge Taylor would routinely attend meetings when requested by the Dallas Alliance. Thus, to compartmentalize acronyms throughout my study, I am using the official name of the committee, the Dallas Alliance. However to reiterate, the Tri-Ethnic Committee and Dallas Alliance were one in the same. Dallas Alliance, One-Way Busing of the Races. Audio Recording Desegregation Plan. (Dallas: SMU Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, Litigations Archive Division, January 1976).
183 However, as explained in a previous footnote, the depths to which Mexican-American Dallasites were active in the school rights and Civil Rights Movements, respectively, were not assessed in great detail. While it has been noted that Tasby was filed on the behalf of all African American and Mexican-American school-aged children, this study generally highlights the African American and White discourse. Thus, the uses of Mexican-American counter-narratives were only highlighted to project the individual opinions of some Mexican-American Dallasites. In no way are these counter-narratives generalizable or wholly indicative of an entire ethnic group’s lived experience in Dallas. 95
First, we are coming down to the wire and the ‘Chicano,’ one way or another is going to get shafted as usual. . . . The ones that always get shafted are the people of West Dallas. Let’s face it. They are the ones that are never represented. They are the poor and no one gives a darn because we have never had representation. . . . The reason that I am here, I am not representing anybody. I am talking, Victor Bonita, and I am telling you the way that I feel. . . If you wanna hear from me, I will tell it to you exactly how I feel [sic]. And, this is how I feel. The ‘Chicanos’ here [on the Dallas Alliance committee] are never here, and I’m upset because we are coming down to the wire and the ‘Chicanos’ are the only ones that don’t have any kind of a plan. . . . So I feel that it is a terrible committee and you should replace these [‘Chicano’ representatives] that just don’t care about coming to these meetings. The other thing is this agenda for involvement . . . In 1971, there was a court order that was passed. And, here it is ’76 and nobody has obeyed that court order. There was supposed to be about 2,000 White students that were supposed to go to Lincoln or to Pinkston and they never went over that way. So how do you think that they are going to obey it this time? And . . . we [‘Chicanos’] are not going to be shafted no more [sic]. If that means that we are gonna have to fight like Boston, then that’s what we’re gonna do [sic]. But I will not let my people get shaft. I don’t work for anybody. I got my own little place of business and if it burns down, I can build another one. But I don’t have to get on my knees for this. So, you take this back to all of these different committees, that the ‘Chicanos’ and I’m speaking for these ‘Blacks,’ we are not gonna take no more pushing around [sic]. If it means that we are going to go into a war, then that’s what we are gonna do [sic]. We are tired of paying taxes and getting an inferior education. We are tired of going to war and sitting at the back of the bus . . . eating slop. We will do it no more. We are tired. 1976 is the year of the changes. We will wait no longer. This is as far as we are moving, right here. So, either they are going to help us or there’s gonna be some changes in Dallas, Texas [sic]. . . . We don’t call it the perfect city. We call it the city of assassination. Where the ‘Black’ and the Brown have been assassinated spiritually! And, this is what is happening to us right now. We are tired of running so, something has to give and it is not gonna be the Black or the Brown no more [sic].184
While it is evident that the African American, White, nor Mexican-American populace preferred forced busing as the means to resolve schooling discrimination, some Dallas
Independent School District students remained hopeful that the true “confluence of cultures” would one day prevail.185 For example, in 1976, Kay Massacre attended a Dallas Alliance forum
184 Statement by Mr. Victor Bonita before the Dallas Alliance, Chicanos and Blacks Will Fight Discrimination, Open to the Public Forum, January 1976.
185 Kay Massacre speaking before the Dallas Alliance, Cultural Values: That Which Is Not Understood Is Either Shun or Rejected, Concerned Skyline High School Students Meeting, 1976. 96 wherein she spoke about cultural responsiveness. At the time of the meeting, Kay Massacre was a student at Skyline High School. Taking the microphone, Massacre said, “We feel that in this day and time of even conflict, that it is imperative that we learn to understand and appreciate each other. For that which is not understood is either shun or rejected. And, nothing has been more understood than different cultural values.” Rather than advocate for innovative and culturally-inclusive programs, the Dallas Alliance indeed enforced busing, therein disregarding community input.
Resulting from forced busing was the surge of White flight. Summated by Texas Senator
John Tower,
Most Americans oppose racial segregation and discrimination, for which busing is purported to be a remedy. But busing is a means to an end—not an end in itself – and if the means is not working, it should be abandoned in favor of a different means that will work. . . . Forced busing is counterproductive. The ostensible purpose of forced busing it to promote racial integration and harmony [sic]. However, anyone who reads newspapers or watches television knows that it had had the opposite effect. Forced busing aggravates racial tensions and polarizes ‘Blacks’ and Whites. Moreover, busing intensifies the deterioration of the core cities by accelerating White flight to the suburbs.186
Outcomes
By 1975, the Fifth Circuit District Court reexamined the implementation strategies and effects forced student busing had on the Dallas Independent School District.187 Complementary to this, in its 1975 “Desegregation Progress Report to the Fifth Circuit,” the Dallas Alliance acknowledged the multitude of ways absolute desegregation had not been achieved. This, the
Dallas Alliance reasoned, was due to White flight. In its analyses, the Dallas Alliance also referenced the newly proposed “Student Assignment Plan for Elementary and Secondary
186 Senator John Tower, "The Senator on Busing " Dallas Morning News, September 1978.
187 Richard E. Andre, "Transition Study," in Study of Instruction ed. Francis S. Chase (Dallas: United States District Court Fifth Circuit, 19 May 1975). 97
Schools.” The Dallas Alliance believed the plan stood to counteract free choice.188 Also, while assessing the partial success of the district’s previous desegregation initiatives, the Dallas
Alliance acknowledged that the district court also requested that the committee revise some of its desegregation plans as well. While these factors were included in the committee’s analyses, omitted entirely from the report were the negative affects forced student busing had on the cultural makeup of the City of Dallas and its Dallas Independent School District.189 Regardless of the overlook, the Dallas Alliance did assess the findings of institutional racism by Judge Sarah
T. Hughes and others. To alleviate the label of “institutional racism,” innovative educational programs like magnet schools were proposed.190
While he was assigned to the case, Judge William M. Taylor consistently asked himself,
(1.) Must minority groups other than ‘Negroes’ be considered in creating racially mixed schools? (2.) Must single race school districts be dissolved and combined with other districts in order to enhance racial mixing? (3.) Does the Constitution prohibit de facto as well as de jure segregation? [In his personal notes, Judge Taylor continued,] ‘However these questions are answered, the administrative problems presented in creating a constitutional plan could become overwhelming. Whatever the wisdom of the judiciary’s original involvement in desegregation, it would be tragic for the forces of equality to be frustrated, after victory in so many battles, merely because the courts could not rise to the task presented them.’191
188 Dallas Alliance, "Progress Report to the Fifth Circuit," in Tasby vs. Estes Desegregation Plans (Dallas: United States Federal District Court, Fifth Circuit, 1975).
189 Forced student busing not only continued but also increased over the years. By the start of the 1976- 1977 school years more than 13,000 students were being bused to assigned schools. As mandatory busing persistently increased, so too did White flight.
190 According to a 1975 Dallas Alliance meeting, committee members considered the creation of magnet schools to be schooling facilities that would curb the rate of White flight. Dallas Alliance Education Task Force, "1976 Revised Dallas Alliance Desegregation Plan," ed. Jack Lowe Sr. (Dallas: United States District Court, Fifth Circuit, 3 March 1976).
191 William M. Taylor Jr., "Judge Taylor's Personal Research Questions Pertaining to Tasby v. Estes " (Dallas: SMU Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, Litigation Archives Division, 1974). 98
One may assume these questions were subconsciously asked by countless Dallasites, not only
Judge Taylor. Although these questions appear rather simple on their face, to non-African
Americans the underlying agendas of social and educational equality were quite challenging and complex. It can be said that African American Dallasites consistently battled for civil, social, and educational equality. Consequently, the fundamental wars that raged on during these aforementioned movements were the wars on power and privilege. Concluded by African
American leader, and Dallas civil right architect, Reverend Rhett James,
African Americans have to win their own freedom [emphasis mine]. When are we going to learn the facts of life: that you can’t be ‘Negro’ leaders without totally identifying with ‘Negro’ causes, and remain loyal to these causes [sic]. We fool no one but ourselves if we think the Dallas School Board is going to do the right thing on their own. What has been done and what will be done comes from direct appeals, court actions and direct action from ‘Negro’ movements, with all involved in them dedicated to the cause of eradicating barriers which separate some and render them inferior.192
192 Rhett James, Dallas Express 16 June 1962; Dulaney, "Whatever Happened to the Civil Rights Movement in Dallas, Texas?," 83. 99
CHAPTER 5
POST-TASBY DALLAS, 1970s AND BEYOND
Indeed, as it had been foreshadowed by Edward Kelley, thousands of White Dallasites began to let their voices be heard vis-à-vis the use of residential purchasing power outside of the
Dallas city limits. For instance, according to Dallas Independent School District student enrollment statistics, the district suffered a loss of approximately 14, 350 students between the
1970-1974 academic years.193 Juxtaposed to the decrease of students attending public school in the city, Dallas’ northern suburban towns experienced exponential residential and school growth.
This chapter therefore concludes this study by focusing on the reaction of White Dallasites to the legal activism of African American Dallasites, as it relates to the desegregation of the Dallas
Independent School District.
White Flight
While it was noted that North Texans of all categorized races, including African
American, Mexican-American, “Oriental,” and “American Indian” began to relocate to Dallas’ northern suburbs, White Dallasites migrated away from the city and into suburban areas at a far greater rate than all other ethnic groups. According to a 1975 study conducted by the Dallas
Independent School District, the White population in the suburban cities of: Carrollton, Farmers
Branch, Commerce, Denton, Highland Park, Plano, Richardson, and a host of other neighboring
Dallas enclaves, grew at a rate of 19.74 percent.194 Such suburban growth was collectively
193 Richard E. Andre, "Transition Study," in Study of Instruction ed. Francis S. Chase (Dallas: United States District Court Fifth Circuit, 19 May 1975).
194 Ibid.
100 experienced over a five-year period.195 Specifically, during the 1970-1971 academic terms,
185,310 White school-aged students were enrolled in schools located in Dallas’ northern suburbs, rather than the city’s Dallas Independent School District. Further, with the enactment and implementation of busing in the Dallas Independent School District, White student enrollment in Dallas’ northern suburban schools continuously climbed. To summate, during the
1974-1975 academic terms known as the climax of court-ordered forced school busing, 221,896
White students enrolled in suburban schools surrounding Dallas County.196
Juxtaposed to this statistic, the “Salient Characteristics Study” completed by researchers on the school district noted that only 66,000 White students were enrolled in the Dallas
Independent School District during the 1974- 1975 term.197 Thus, White students on average attended public schools in the suburbs than inside the inner-city at a ratio of 3:1. Further summated in the “Report of a Study of Instruction and other Influences on Learning in the Dallas
Independent School District” was that,
The enrollment in Dallas schools began to decline with the 1970-1971 school years as a result of migration of middle class families to suburban districts. The proportion of Whites in the school population dropped from over fifty per cent in 1970-1971 to approximately 44 per cent in 1974-1975; and the total White enrollment fell from more than 94,000 in 1970-1971 to slightly above 66,000 in 1974-1975. Social stratification in Dallas as in other large cities is very marked; and those of the lowest socioeconomic status are concentrated heavily in the southern and western sectors of the inner city.198
195 Ibid. This report is found in Box 4, File 17 at the SMU Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, litigation Archives Division.
196 Ibid.
197 Ibid.
198 Ibid., 19. 101
The massive implementation of public school student busing plans brought about the surge of residential White Flight away from the inner city. Subsequently, the onset effect of White flight was responsible for the redefined image of Dallas, Texas.
A Changed Dallas Independent School District Demographical Landscape
Historically marketed as a “perfect” city, Dallas, Texas, like other large urban areas, was adversely affected by particular desegregation methods. By the mid-1970s, as White Dallasites began moving away to the northern suburbs, the city’s public schooling system underwent transformation. Indeed, several conversations between the Dallas Alliance, Judge William M.
Taylor, and Judge Harold Barefoot Sanders centered on the surge and effect White flight had on the Dallas Independent School District. Additionally, conversations also focused on the overall city structure and image of Dallas, Texas. In fact, as early as 1972, the Dallas Alliance began to openly discuss their concerns regarding White flight, in court-appointed committee meetings.
Further, as late as 1981, Dallasites were assessing the ways in which DISD’s longest litigated case, Tasby vs. Estes, busing and other desegregation strategies were affecting the social, economic, and physical categorization of the once-pristine city. For instance, Dallas Morning
News journalist Terrence Stutz reported in “White Flight Blamed for Loss of Students” that,
White flight and ‘White avoidance’ have been key factors in the loss of more than 55,000 White students from Dallas public schools during the past decade, a top- ranking school administrator testified Thursday in federal court. Associate Superintendent Bill Webster, taking the stand during the fourth day of new desegregation hearings, produced statistics showing the district’s White student population has been reduced by more than 50 percent since 1970, when the current desegregation lawsuit began. That year the Dallas Independent School District was 59 percent White, twice the current level of 29.5 percent. Of this year’s [1981] enrollment of 128,658 students, 37,989 are White. . . . Asked to explain the large decline in White enrollment, Webster pointed to concern by White parents over the ‘uncertainty’ caused by the district’s long-running legal battle over desegregation. While White flight out of the district was very typical in the early and mid-1970s, Webster said the past three years have been characterized more by highly mobile White families moving into the Dallas area 102
and avoiding residence in the Dallas school district because of its unstable desegregation situation. ‘White avoidance’ has been more of a factor than White flight in declining ‘White enrollment’ . . ., Webster said. A report submitted to [Federal Judge Barefoot] Sanders by Webster said that ‘the relationship between desegregation orders and abrupt declines in White enrollment is too conspicuous to be attributed to chance.199 Subsequently, indications of both White flight as well as White avoidance were documented and assumed to have been transparent effects of public school desegregation orders as under Tasby.
Consequently, the Dallas Independent School District became an overwhelming minority- saturated district. Further noted in a 1982 issue of the Dallas Times Herald were various charts and graphs that summated the racial and ethnic district transformation. According to the Times
Herald, by the 1981-1982 school years, the Dallas Independent School District was 49.9 percent
African American, 27.8 percent White, 20.7 percent Hispanic, and 1.6 percent Asian and
American Indian.200 Clearly, the Dallas Independent School District has undergone an influx of student demographic transformations in the year’s post-Tasby.
While it is evident that Dallas indeed changed overtime, the journey toward creating a unitary schooling system did not wholly bring about a drastically different sociopolitical vision for the city. To be sure, Dallas civic leaders continuously held on to the belief that Dallas was, in fact, a superior city. As late as 1976 Dallas Mayor Adlene Harrison delivered a statement that reinforced the ideals of law, order, and image. Harrison denoted that,
Not all members of the City Council are unanimous in how the community should be built and governed. But I am certain, from what I have heard them say and do, that they are without exception staunchly committed to seeking solutions within the legally constituted system and each has fully endorsed the rule of the law and voluntary compliance with the law of the land, as it is properly constituted and implemented. I know that the citizens of Dallas, with me, will never have another peaceful night’s rest if any Dallas child is harmed—physically or emotionally-by
199 Terrence Stutz, "White Flight Blamed for Loss of Students," Dallas Morning News, 1 May 1981.
200 Dale Rice, "Changing Student Ethnicity in DISD," Dallas Times Herald, 11 April 1982. 103
any irresponsible act by a lawless person following the implementation of the court’s findings. Even though we may not all concur with the court’s ruling, we do agree on peaceful means and responsible discussion. I am therefore confident that the moderate majority will work hard with the City Council all day, every day, if necessary, to achieve educational excellence through legal processes. For those who may doubt the will of the majority, I assure you that any act of civil disobedience will be dealt with promptly and firmly. Violations of the law— affecting the security of life or property, or free passage on Dallas streets—will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the criminal justice system. Personally, I am committed to action which will heal the communities of Dallas and renew the tradition which has held for twenty-five years—peaceful integration of public facilities, open accommodations, and open housing—all in a spirit of the greatest good for all the people in the city. Dallas is setting the example for fairness and morality—and stands tall as one of the few major cities in Texas and the southwest. . . . Dallas has been the exception to the rule of other cities. . . . Dallas has been committed to high standards and a quality of life for all citizens, not just a few [emphasis mine].201
Dallas civic leaders generally believed that, regardless of circumstance, the image and supremacy that was the Dallas Way would prevail.
Conclusion
Until very recently, much of Dallas’ history had been unknown and subsequently uncontested. Given the scarcity of historical review, only a few of Dallas’ prominent historians and field reporters paid attention to the impact civic issues had on tarnishing the self-ordained image that became The Dallas Way. Even still, none of Dallas’ historians went into grave detail to address the history of said injustices. Further, none of the city’s historians addressed how
Dallas’ de jure segregated environment perpetuated educational inequality. Additionally, the ways in which social strife threatened the city’s larger sociopolitical infrastructure was also rarely mentioned. Racism and unfair practices persisted throughout the history of Dallas, with residual vestiges of discrimination continuing on into the city’s contemporary social landscape.
Therefore, the Brown v. Board of Education decision and the Civil Rights Movement, juxtaposed
201 Adlene Harrison, "Statement on United States District Court Order," (Dallas: SMU Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, Litigations Archives Division, March 1976). 104 to the ways in which African Americans harnessed resiliency to sheer determination, remained widely unidentified.
Due to Dallas’ African American and White community’s failure to enter into productive social discourse, a lengthy education litigation battle ensued. However, the lack of a well- researched African American narrative led many to believe that one’s experience in Dallas was similar to that of nearby Southern cities like Little Rock, Arkansas, or New Orleans, Louisiana.
Yet, given the present research, it is clear that African American Dallasites suffered a particularly unique battle for social and civic equality. The relentless voyage by African
American Dallasites to achieve social equality was incredibly different from the agenda of
Dallas’s leading White businessmen.
Where Dallas’s African American community sought justice as a means for obtaining and utilizing fair practices, political access, and educational opportunity, White Dallasites sought to control and dissolve community disagreement that stood to jeopardize the image of Dallas. By the 1960s, while White Dallasites viewed desegregation as an unavoidable “coming,” African
American Dallasites believed desegregation to be the initial step toward acknowledging and correcting injustice. As it relates to the right of schooling equality, it was the perseverance of
African American Dallasites seeking simple justice that propelled the Dallas Independent School
District to adopt desegregation plans that sought to address schooling and resource inequity.
Despite such a significant gap in the literature, the school rights movement and evolution of the
American Civil Rights Movement, in Dallas, Texas was not a completely inexpressible narrative.
While the more recognized and distinguished Dallas historians neglected to substantively illustrate how the agenda of African American Dallasites was satisfied at the height of conflict, 105 many known and unknown narratives continue to exist. These counter-narratives thereby challenge the city’s perceived reputation and history.
To recount, Brown struck a devastating blow to Texas custom and tradition when it ruled in favor of desegregated public schooling. Chief Justice Warren called out the southern sector of the United States to fix its public schools systems. This especially included Texas. Contended by historian William Henry Kellar, “In Texas, reactions at the state level ranged from the absurd to the embarrassing.”202 Initially, some Texas officials like Attorney General John Ben Shepperd requested that the state desegregate its schools gradually to prevent mobs, rioting, and violence.203 Yet overwhelmingly, several others concurred with Judge Atwell. Federal District
Judge William Harley Atwell legally countered the opinion of the high court when he decided to dismiss the 1955 case of Bell v. Rippy in Dallas. Atwell emphasized that the Supreme Court’s decision was neither enforceable nor based on law. Judge Atwell presumed that the Warren
Court erred in its judgment because the case was decided on feelings and psychological analyses rather than the rule of law.204
Texas schools were significantly impacted by Brown. In Dallas, organizations like the
NAACP and the Dallas Citizens Council, however reluctant, made great strides toward forcing the state to recognize its African American populace. Yet, it was the unrelenting use of legal channels by Dallas’ African American community that generated improved access to school for minority students. The Brown decision did more than make a conscious and concerted effort to address the issue of racial discrimination throughout the South. It very well was responsible for
202 William Henry Kellar, Make Haste Slowly: Moderates, Conservatives, and School Desegregation in Houston (College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 1999), 66.
203 Ibid.
204 William H. Atwell, "Atwell on School Integration " The Dallas Morning News 21 December 1956, Accessed through the Texas/Dallas Historical & Archives Division. 106 projecting civil rights activism forward in Dallas. Brown seamlessly ushered in the hope for a better tomorrow in the City of Dallas, State of Texas, as well as throughout the nation. Overtime the Brown decision, alongside the city’s own litigation battles, revolutionized the city’s public schooling system and organizational makeup. While Bell v. Rippy (1955) is the origin of socially and educationally-conscious claims against the Dallas Independent School District, Bell would merely be the origin of what would become numerous legal filings against the district.
Under Tasby, the Fifth Circuit District Court was proactively addressing schooling inequality based upon race. In Dallas, forced busing implementation strategies were being assessed by researchers. In addition to that, the demographic transformation of the Dallas
Independent School District also became a primary concern for many businessmen, politicians, and leaders throughout the city.205 Sadly, in its 1975 “Desegregation Progress Report to the Fifth
Circuit,” the Dallas Alliance acknowledged the ways in which absolute desegregation had not been achieved. Segregation was persisting because of White flight. Regardless of the district’s quest to create a desegregated school district, White Dallasites fled the city in opposition.
Because of this, one may reason that the Dallas Independent School District never truly desegregated.
205 Richard E. Andre, "Transition Study," in Study of Instruction ed. Francis S. Chase (Dallas: United States District Court Fifth Circuit, 19 May 1975). 107
BIBLIOGRAPHY
"Administrative Policies and Procedures 1956-1957." Dallas: Dallas Independent School District, 1956.
Alemán, Enrique. "Situating Texas School Finance Policy in a CRT Framework: How ‘Substantially Equal’ Yields Racial Inequity." Educational Administration Quarterly 43, no. 5 (2007): 525-58.
Alexander, George J., and Thomas S. Szasz. "Mental Illness as an Excuse for Civil Wrongs." Notre Dame Law Review 43 (1967): 24-38.
Alexander Jr, Rudolph. Racism, African Americans, and Social Justice. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2005.
Anderson, Eric, and Alfred A. Moss Jr., eds. The Facts of Reconstruction: Essays in Honor of John Hope Franklin. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1991.
Anderson, James D. The Education of Blacks in the South, 1860-1935. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1988.
———. "Northern Foundations and the Shaping of Southern Black Rural Education, 1902-1935." In The Social History of American Education, edited by B. Edward McClellan and William J. Reese. Urbana: The University of Illinois Press, 1988.
———. "A Tale of Two Browns: Constitutional Equality and Unequal Education." Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education 105, no. 2 (2006): 14-35.
———. “Race-Conscious Educational Policies Versus a ‘Color-Blind Constitution’: A Historical Perspective.” Educational Researcher 36, no. 5 (2007): 249-257.
Anderson, Jervis. A. Philip Randolph: A Biographical Portrait. Oakland: University of California Press, 1973.
Andre, Richard E. "Transition Study." In Study of Instruction edited by Francis S. Chase. Dallas: United States District Court Fifth Circuit, May 19, 1975.
Atwell, William Harley "Atwell on School Integration." The Dallas Morning News, December 21, 1956.
Baer, Frances Lisa Resistance to Public School Desegregation: Little Rock, Arkansas, and Beyond. El Paso: LFB Scholarly Publishing, 2008.
Bailey, Beth, and David Farber. "The ‘Double-V’ Campaign in World War II Hawaii: African Americans, Racial Ideology, and Federal Power." Journal of Social History 26, no. 4 (1993): 817-43.
108
Bailey, Fred Arthur. "That Which God Hath Put Asunder: White Baptists, Black Aliens, and the Southern Social Order, 1890–1920." In Politics and Religion in the White South, edited by Glen Feldman. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 2005.
Barenblat, Rachel. Texas, The Lone Star State. World Almanac: Library of the States. Milwaukee: Gareth Stevens, 2002.
Barnett, Bernice McNair. "Invisible Southern Black Women Leaders in the Civil Rights Movement: The Triple Constraints of Gender, Race, and Class." Gender and Society 7, no. 2 (1993): 162-82.
Barnum, David G. "The Supreme Court and Public Opinion: Judicial Decision Making in the Post-New Deal Period." The Journal of Politics 47, no. 2 (1985): 652-66.
Barr, Alwyn. Black Texans: A History of African Americans in Texas, 1528-1995. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1996.
Bartholomew, Harland, and Associates. "A Master Plan for Dallas, Texas." St. Louis: Bartholomew and Associates, 1944.
Bartley, Numan V. The Rise of Massive Resistance: Race and Politics in the South During the 1950's. Baton Rouge: Lousiana State University Press, 1999.
Beals, Melba Pattillo. Warriors Don't Cry: Searing Memoir of Battle to Integrate Little Rock. New York: Washington Square Press, 1995.
Behnken, Brian D. "The ‘Dallas Way’: Protest, Response, and the Civil Rights Experience in Big D and Beyond." The Southwestern Historical Quarterly 111, no. 1 (2007): 1-29.
———. "Elusive Unity: African Americans, Mexican Americans, and Civil Rights in Houston." In Seeking Inalienable Rights: Texans and Their Quest for Justice, edited by Debra A. Reid, 123- 45. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2009.
———. Fighting Their Own Battles: Mexican Americans, African Americans, and the Struggle for Civil Rights in Texas. Chappel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2011.
Bell Jr, Derrick A. "Serving Two Masters: Integration Ideals and Client Interests in School Desegregation Litigation." Yale Law Journal 85 (1975): 470.
Bell Jr., Derrick A. "Brown v. Board of Education and the Interest-Convergence Dilemma." Harvard Law Review 93 (1979): 518-33.
Bell, Derek. And We Are Not Saved: The Elusive Quest for Racial Justice. New York: Basic Books, 1987.
———. Faces at the Bottom of the Well: The Permanence of Racism. New York: Basic Books, 1992.
109
———. Silent Covenants: Brown v. Board of Education and the Unfulfilled Hopes for Racial Reform. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.
Bell, Jack. The Johnson Treatment: How Lyndon B. Johnson Took over the Presidency and Made It His Own. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1965.
Bell V. Rippy, 133 F. Supp. 811 (1955).
Black, William N. "Empire of Consensus: City Planning, Zoning, and Annexation in Dallas, 1900- 1960." New York: Columbia University, 1982.
Blackmon, Douglas A. Slavery by Another Name: The Re-Enslavement of Black Americans from the Civil War to World War II. New York: Random House, 2009.
Blanton, Annie Webb Blanton. Twenty-Second Biennial Report of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction State of Texas: School Sessions of 1920-21 and 1921-22. Austin: Von Boeckmann- Jones Co., 1923.
Bloom, Sam R. "Dallas at the Crossroads." Dallas: Bloom Advertising Agency, 1961. https://youtu.be/ZlSRneWr7PY.
Boner, Marian O. "Historical Background." In A Reference Guide to Texas Law and Legal History: Sources and Documentation, edited by Karl T. Gruben and James E. Hambleton. Austin: Butterworth Legal Publishers, 1987.
Borders V. Rippy, 247 F. 2d 268 (1957).
Bralley, F.M. Seventeenth Biennial Report of the State Department of Education for the Years Ending August 31, 1909, and August 31, 1910. Austin: Austin Printing Co., 1911.
Branch, Taylor. Parting the Waters: America in the King Years 1954-63. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1988.
Branton, W.A. "Little Rock Revisited: Desegregation to Resegregation." The Journal of Negro Education 52, no. 3 (1983): 250-69.
Brauer, Carl M. John F. Kennedy and the Second Reconstruction. New York: Columbia University Press, 1977.
Bridges, Ruby. Through My Eyes: The Autobiography of Ruby Bridges. Bloomindale: Scholastic Press Inc., 1999.
Brophy, William. "Active Acceptance—Active Containment: The Dallas Story." In Southern Businessmen and Desegregation, edited by Elizabeth Jacoway and David R. Colburn, 135-150. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1982.
110
Brown, Frank. "The First Serious Implementation of Brown: The 1964 Civil Rights Act and Beyond." Journal of Negro Education 73, no. 3 (2004): 182-90.
Brown, Jennifer K. "The Nineteenth Amendment and Women's Equality." The Yale Law Journal 102, no. 8 (1993): 2175-2204.
Bruno, James E. Emerging Issues in Education: Policy Implications for the Schools. Lanham: Lexington Books, 1972.
Brunsman, Howard G. A Report of the Seventeenth Decennial Census of the United States Census of Population: 1950 Volume II Characteristics of the Population Number of Inhabitants, General and detailed Characteristics of the Population- Part 43 Texas. Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1952.
Bryant, Nick. The Bystander: John F. Kennedy and the Struggle for Black Equality. New York: Basic Books, 2006.
Bullock, Henry Allen. A History of Negro Education in the South: From 1619 to the Present. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1970.
Burger, Chief Justice Warren E. "Annoted Syllabus of Swann et al. Vs. Charlotte-Mecklenburg et al., Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit by Tasby v. Estes Presiding Judge William M. Taylor." edited by Supreme Court of the United States. Dallas: SMU Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, Litigation Archives Division, April 20, 1971.
Burns, James MacGregor, ed. To Heal and to Build: The Programs of President Lyndon B. Johnson. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1968.
Burstein, Paul. "Public Opinion, Demonstrations, and the Passage of Antidiscrimination Legislation." Public Opinion Quarterly 43, no. 2 (1979): 157-72.
Butts, Marion "Desegregating the State Fair of Texas." Legacies: A History Journal for Dallas and North Central Texas (2004).
Calvert, Robert A., Arnoldo De Leon, and Gregg Cantrell. The History of Texas. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2013.
Cargile, Donald and Mary Cargile. Letter. September 18, 1975.
Carmack, William R., and Theodore Freedman. Field Reports on Desegregation in the South: Dallas, Texas. Edited by United States Department of Health, Education & Welfare: Office of Education. New York: Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, 1962.
Carney, Carolyn Ann. "The ‘City of Hate’: Anti-Communist and Conservative Attitudes in Dallas, Texas, 1950-1964." PhD diss., University of Texas at Arlington, 1994. 111
Carrington, Paul D. "Financing the American Dream: Equality and School Taxes." Columbia Law Review 73, no. 6 (1973): 1227-60.
Carson, Clayborne. The Autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr. New York: Hachette Digital, Inc., 2001.
Carter, Dan T. From George Wallace to Newt Gingrich: Race in the Conservative Counterrevolution, 1963-1994. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1996.
Cashin, Sheryll D. "Shall We Overcome-Transcending Race, Class, and Ideology through Interest Convergence." St. John's Law Review 79 (2005): 253.
Chalmers, David Mark Hooded Americanism: The History of the Ku Klux Klan. Durham: Duke University Press, 1981.
Chappell, David L. Inside Agitators: White Southerners in the Civil Rights Movement. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994.
Cioffi, Federick T. Letter. September 18, 1975.
Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of Justice. "Overview of Titie VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964." United States Government, http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/cor/coord/titlevi.php.
Clark, E. Culpepper. The Schoolhouse Door: Segregation's Last Stand at the University of Alabama. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.
Clark, Kenneth Bancroft, and Mamie K. Clark. "The Development of Consciousness of Self and the Emergence of Racial Identification in Negro Preschool Children." The Journal of Social Psychology 10, no. 4 (1939): 591-99.
Clark, Kenneth Bancroft, and Mamie P. Clark. "Emotional Factors in Racial Identification and Preference in Negro Children." Journal of Negro Education Summer (1950): 341-50.
Clark, Kenneth Bancroft, and Mamie P. Clark. Racial Identification and Preference in Negro Children. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1918.
Coker, William J., Jr. "Lessons Well Learned." In Remembering Jim Crow: African Americans Tell About Life in the Segregated South, edited by William H Chafe, Raymond Gavins and Robert Korstad. New York: The New Press, 2001.
Colaiaco, James A. Frederick Douglass and the Fourth of July. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006.
Coleman, James S. "Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital." American Journal of Sociology 94 (1988): S95-S120.
112
Coles, Robert. The Story of Ruby Bridges. Bloomindale: Scholastic Press Inc., 1995.
Conde, Carlos. "Negro Suit Expected over School Mixing." Dallas Morning News, July 13, 1964.
Conkle, W. H. Letter. September 20, 1975.
Connally, Sue. "Integration Problem Outline by White." Dallas Times Herald, 1956.
Criswell, W.A. "Christianity and Segregation." In Address to South Carolina Legislature. South Carolina: Citizens' Council of America Literature Collection, February 22, 1956.
Crockett, Travis. "Letters from Readers: Segregation Effects." The Dallas Morning News, July 29, 1951.
Cronkite, Walter. President Kennedy Is Dead. Dallas: CBS, November 22, 1963.
Crouch, Barry A., and L.J. Schultz. "Crisis in Color: Racial Separation in Texas During Reconstruction.” Civil War History 16, no. 1 (1970): 37-49.
———. “’All the Vile Passions’: The Texas Black Code of 1866." The Southwestern Historical Quarterly 97, no. 1 (1993): 12-34.
Cunningham, Sean P. "The Perfect Storm: Social Change, Partisan Realignment, and the Transformation of Modern Texas Conservatism, 1963-1980." PhD diss., University of Florida, 2007.
———. Cowboy Conservatism: Texas and the Rise of the Modern Right. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 2010.
Dallas Aliance. "Progress Report to the Fifth Circuit." In Tasby vs. Estes Desegregation Plans. Dallas: United States Federal District Court, Fifth Circuit, 1975.
———. One-Way Busing of the Races. Dallas: SMU Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, Litigations Archive Division, January 1976. Audio Recording Desegregation Plan.
———. Chicanos and Blacks Will Fight Discrimination, In Open to the Public Forum, January 1976.
———. Cultural Values: That Which Is Not Understood Is Either Shun or Rejected, In Open to the Public forum for Concerned Skyline Students, 1976.
Dallas Alliance Education Task Force. "1976 Revised Dallas Alliance Desegregation Plan." edited by Jack Lowe Sr. Dallas: United States District Court, Fifth Circuit, March 3, 1976.
Dallas Independent School District. "Annual Report: What We Accomplished Together in 2012-2013." edited by Dallas Independent School District. Dallas: Dallas Independent School District, 2013.
———. "Dallas Independent School District: Study of Instruction Report." Dallas,, 1975.
113
Daniel, Pete. Lost Revolutions: The South in the 1950s. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2000.
Darling-Hammond, Linda. The Flat World and Education: How America's Commitment to Equity Will Determine Our Future. New York: Teachers College Press, 2010.
Daugherity, Brian J., and Charles C. Bolton. With All Deliberate Speed: Implementing Brown v. Board of Education. Fayetteville: The University of Arkansas Press, 2008.
Davidson, James M. "Living Symbols of Their Lifelong Struggles: In Search of the Home and Household in the Heart of Freedman's Town, Dallas, Texas". In Household Chores and Household Choices: Theorizing the Domestic Sphere in Historical Archeology, edited by Kerri S. Barile and Jamie C. Brandon, 75-106. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press, 2004.
Delgado, Richard. "Explaining the Rise and Fall of African American Fortunes-Interest Convergence and Civil Rights Gains." Harvard Civil Rights- Civil Liberties Law Review 37 (2002): 369-87.
DISD Desegregation Oral History Collection. “Brown v. Board of Education.” Oral history interviews. Austin: University of Texas at Austin Briscoe Center for American History, 2003.
Donaldson, Gary A. The First Modern Campaign: Kennedy, Nixon, and the Election of 1960. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2007.
Doyle, William. An American Insurrection: James Meredith and the Battle of Oxford, Mississippi, 1962. New York: Anchor Publishing 2003.
Du Bois, William Edward Burghardt. The Souls of Black Folk. New York: Oxford University Press, 1903.
———. Black Reconstruction in America with an Introduction by David Levering Lewis. New York: The Free Press, 1998.
Dulaney, W. Marvin. "The Progressive Voters League: A Political Voice for African Americans in Dallas." Legacies: A History Journal for Dallas and North Central Texas 3, no. Spring (1991).
———. "Whatever Happened to the Civil Rights Movement in Dallas, Texas?". In Essays on the American Civil Rights Movement, edited by W Marvin Dulaney and Kathleen Underwood, 66- 95. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 1993.
Duncan, Dawson. "Record Number of Lawsuits Attack Segregation in Texas." Dallas Morning News, September 10, 1950.
Durham, Martin. White Rage: The Extreme Right and American Politics. New York: Routledge 2007.
Eagles, Charles W. Price of Defiance: James Meredith and the Integration of Ole Miss. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2009. 114
Eddie M. Tasby et al. v. Estes et al., (1970-2003).
"Eleventh Annual Report of the Board of Directors of the Dallas Public Schools, for the School Year Ending June 30, 1895." Dallas: Published by Authority, 1895.
Elliott, Karen. "Dallas May Face Suit: Progress on School Integration Questioned." Dallas Express, September 27, 1970.
Ely Jr., James W. The Crisis of Conservative Virginia: The Byrd Organization and the Politics of Massive Resistance. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press 1976.
Emerson, Emory. "No Justice for Blacks." Dallas Times Herald, April 3, 1981.
Emerson, Michael O., Jenifer Bratter, Junia Howell, P. Wilner Jeanty, and Mike Cline. "Houston Region Grows More Racially/Ethnically Diverse, with Small Declines in Segregation:A Joint Report Analyzing Census Data from 1990, 2000, and 2010." Kinder Institute for Urban Research & Hobby Center for the State of Texas, 2012.
Entin, Jonathan L. "Sweatt v. Painter, the End of Segregation, and the Transformation of Education Law." Review of Litigation Journal 5, no. 3 (1986).
Enstam, Elizabeth York. Women and the Creation of Urban Life: Dallas, Texas, 1843-1920 Centennial Series of the Association of Former Students. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 1998.
Eskew, Glenn T. But for Birmingham: The Local and National Movements in the Rivil Rights Struggle. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1997.
Estes, Nolan. "Magnet Schools: Legal and Practical Implications." In Introduction, edited by Nolan Estes and Donald R. Waldrip. Piscataway: New Century Education Corporation, 1978.
Fairbanks, Robert B. For the City as a Whole: Planning, Politics, and the Public Interest in Dallas, Texas, 1900-1965. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1998.
———. "The Good Government Machine: The Citizens Charter Association and Dallas Politics, 1930- 1960." In Essays on Sunbelt Cities and Recent Urban America, edited by Robert B. Fairbanks and Kathleen Underwood, 1-176. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 1990.
———."The Housing Act of 1954 and the War against Slums in the Southwestern United States." In 15th International Planning History Society Conference, 1-19, 1997.
Fairclough, Adam. Teaching Equality: Black Schools in the Age of Jim Crow. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 2001.
115
———. "The Birmingham Protests Pushed President Kennedy to Act on Civil Rights." In The Civil Rights Act of 1964, edited by Robert H. Mayer. Opposing Viewpoints: At Issue in History series, 93-99. Farmington Hills: Greenhaven Press, 2004.
Farmer, James. Lay Bare the Heart: An Autobiography of the Civil Rights Movement. New York: Arbor House, 1985.
Faulk, Mrs. Danny. Letter. September 18, 1975.
Feagin, Joe R., Hernan Vera, and Pinar Batur White Racism: The Basics. New York: Routledge, 2001.
"February 26, 1927." Dallas Express, 1927.
Feldman, Glenn, ed. Before Brown: Civil Rights and White Backlash in the Modern South. Tuscaloosa: University Alabama Press, 2004.
———. Politics and Religion in the White South. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2005.
Ficker, Douglas J. "From Roberts to Plessy: Educational Segregation and the ‘Separate but Equal’ Doctrine." The Journal of Negro History 84, no. 4 (1999): 301-14.
Fiss, Owen M. "The Fate of an Idea Whose Time Has Come: Antidiscrimination Law in the Second Decade after Brown v. Board of Education." The University of Chicago Law Review 41, no. 4 (1974): 742-73.
Forman, James. The Making of Black Revolutionaries. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1972.
Frankenberg, Erica, Chungmei Lee, and Gary Orfield. "A Multiracial Society with Segregated Schools: Are We Losing the Dream?." Cambridge: Harvard Civil Rights Project, 2003.
Franklin, John Hope. Reconstruction after the Civil War. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994.
Frantz, Joe B. "Opening a Curtain: The Metamorphosis of Lyndon B. Johnson." The Journal of Southern History 45, no. 1 (1979): 3-26.
Frazier, Edward Franklin. Black Bourgeoisie: The Rise of a New Middle Class in the United States. New York: Free Press, 1962.
Freeman, Curtis W. "Never Had I Been So Blind: W.A. Criswell's ‘Change’ on Racial Segregation." Journal of Southern Religion 10, no. 1 (2007): 1-12.
Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed with an Introduction by Donaldo Macedo. New York: The Continuum International Publishing Group, Inc., 2000.
Freyer, T.A. "Enforcing Brown in the Little Rock Crisis." The Journal of Appellate Practice & Process 6 (2004): 67. 116
García, Mario T., and Sal Castro. Blowout!: Sal Castro and the Chicano Struggle for Educational Justice. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2011.
Garfinkel, Herbert. "Social Science Evidence and the School Segregation Cases." The Journal of Politics 21, no. 1 (1959): 37-59.
Garfinkel, Herbert. When Negroes March: The March on Washington Movement in the Organizational Politics for FEPC. Vol. 1. New York: Atheneum, 1969.
Garrow, David J. Bearing the Cross: Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc., 1986.
———. The Walking City: The Montgomery Bus Boycott, 1955-1956. Vol. 7. Brooklyn: Carlson Publishing, 1989.
Gibson, Campbell, and Kay Jung. “Population Division: Historical Census Statistics on Population Totals by Race, 1790 to 1990, and by Hispanic Origin, 1970 to 1990.” Washington: U.S. Census Bureau, 2002.
Gillette, Michael L. "The Rise of the NAACP in Texas." Southwestern Historical Quarterly 81, no. 4 (1978): 393-416.
Golden, Harry. Mr. Kennedy and the Negroes. Cleveland: World Publishing Company, 1964.
Golz, Earl. "Lumping Requested." Dallas Times Herald, 1972.
Goode, Victor. "Cultural Racism in Public Education: A Legal Tactic for Black Texans." Howard Law Journal 33 (1990): 321-38.
Gower, Patricia E. "Contrasts in Neglect: Progressive Municipal Reform in Dallas and San Antonio." In Seeking Inalienable Rights: Texans and Their Quest for Justice, edited by Debra A. Reid, 77-96. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2009.
Graff, Harvey J. The Dallas Myth: The Making and Unmaking of an American City. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2008.
Granberry, Michael. "Games to Win, a City to Redeem: Cowboys Felt Weight of City in '63 Game- JFK at 50." Dallas Morning News, September 15, 2013, A1, A27.
Grantham, Dewey W. The Life & Death of the Solid South: A Political History. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1988.
Green, Paul. "The Paradox of the Promised Unfulfilled: Brown v. Board of Education and the Continued Pursuit of Excellence in Education." Journal of Negro Education 73, no. 3 (2004): 268-84.
117
Grooms, Anthony. Bombingham. New York: Ballantine Books, 2001.
Guttery, Ben R. Representing Texas: A Comprehensive History of U.S. And Confederate Senators and Representatives from Texas. Charleston: BookSurge Publishing, 2008.
Hall, Jacquelyn Dowd. "The Long Civil Rights Movement and the Political Uses of the Past." The Journal of American History 91, no. 4 (2005): 1233-63.
Halpern, Stephen C. On the Limits of the Law: The Ironic Legacy of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995.
Hanson, Royce. Civic Culture and Urban Change: Governing Dallas. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2003.
Hare, Kenneth, and Jim Earnhardt. They Walked to Freedom 1955-1956: The Story of the Montgomery Bus Boycott. Champaign: Spotlight Press LLC, 2005.
Harrison, Adlene. "Statement on United States District Court Order." Dallas: SMU Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, Litigations Archives Division, March 1976.
Hazel, Michael V. Dallas: A History of ‘Big D.’ Denton: Texas State Historical Assocation Press, 1997.
Henning, Alison T., Ginger Burns, Richard Hoffman, and Brian Jacoby. "Using Science to Uncover History." Journal of History and Culture 1, no. 2 (2009): 53-66.
Hill, Herbert and James E. Jones. Race in America: The Struggle for Equality. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1993.
Hill, Patricia Evridge. Dallas: The Making of a Modern City. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1996.
Hilsman, Roger. To Move a Nation: The Politics of Foreign Policy in the Administration of John F. Kennedy. New York: Doubleday Publishing, 1967.
Hine, Darlene Clark, Steven F. Lawson, and Merline Pitre. Black Victory: The Rise and Fall of the White Primary in Texas. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2003.
Hogan, William Ransom. The Texas Republic: A Social and Economic History. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1969.
Honey, Michael Keith. Black Workers Remember: An Oral History of Segregation, Unionism, and the Freedom Struggle. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002. hooks, bell. Talking Back: Thinking Feminist, Thinking Black. Boston: South End Press, 1989.
Hornsby, Alton. "’The Colored Branch University’" Issue in Texas-Prelude to Sweatt vs. Painter." Journal of Negro History 61, no. 1 (1976): 51-60. 118
Houston, Ramona. "The NAACP State Conference in Texas: Intermediary and Catalyst for Change, 1937-1957." Journal of African American History 94, no. 4 (2009): 509-28.
Interpretation, Staff-Produced. "Mood of Texas: How It Feels on Integration " Dallas Morning News, October 6, 1957.
"Interracial Group Pickets H.L. Green Store." Dallas Express, October 8, 1960.
Irons, Peter H. Jim Crow’s Children: The Broken Promise of the Brown Decision. New York: The Penguin Group, 2002.
Jackson Jr., John P. Social Scientists for Social Justice: Making the Case against Segregation. New York: New York University Press, 2001.
Jackson, Kenneth T. The Ku Klux Klan in the City, 1915-1930. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 1967.
Jacobs, Gregory S. Getting around Brown: Desegregation, Development, and the Columbus Public Schools. Urban Life and Urban Landscape Series. Colunbus: Ohio State University Press, 1998.
Jacobs, Lawrence R., and Robert Y. Shapiro. "Issues, Candidate Image, and Priming: The Use of Private Polls in Kennedy's 1960 Presidential Campaign." American Political Science Review 88, no. 03 (1994): 527-40.
Jacoway, Elizabeth, and David R. Colburn. Southern Businessmen and Desegregation. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1982.
Jacoway, Elizabeth. "An Introduction: Civil Rights and the Changing South." In Southern Businessmen and Desegregation, edited by Elizabeth Jacoway and David R. Colburn, 1. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1982.
James, Rhett. Dallas Express, June 16, 1962.
Johnson, Lyndon B. "Address before a Joint Session of the Congress." Santa Barbara: The American Presidency Project at The University of California Santa Barbara, November 27, 1963.
———. LBJ’s American Promise: The 1965 Voting Rights Address. Library of Presidential Rhetoric. edited by Garth E. Pauley. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2007.
———. "President Johnson's Special Message to the Congress: The American Promise." edited by Public Papers of the President of the United States, 281-87. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, March 15, 1965.
———. Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: Lyndon B. Johnson, 1963-1964. Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1965.
119
Johnson, Lyndon Baines. The Vantage Point: Perspectives of the Presidency, 1963-1969. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston 1971.
Johnson, Marcia. "The History of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People in Texas." In Prepared for the Texas NAACP: The Earl Carl Institute for Legal and Social Policy, Inc., Social Science Research Network, 2009.
Jonas, Gilbert. Freedom's Sword: The NAACP and the Struggle against Racism in America, 1909-1969. New York: Routledge, 2005.
Kaiser, David. The Road to Dallas: The Assassination of John F. Kennedy. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2008.
Katz, Michael B. The" Underclass" Debate: Views from History. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993.
Kauper, Paul G. . "Segregation in Public Education: The Decline of Plessy v. Ferguson." Michigan Law Review 52, no. 8 (1954): 1137-58.
Kellar, William Henry. Make Haste Slowly: Moderates, Conservatives, and School Desegregation in Houston. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 1999.
Kelley, Edward B. Letter. December 6, 1971.
Kemper, Robert V. "Dallas-Fort Worth: Toward New Models of Urbanization, Community Transformation, and Immigration." Urban Anthropology and Studies of Cultural Systems and World Economic Development 34, no. 2-3 (2005): 125-49.
Kendall, J.S. Twelfth Biennial report of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction for the Scholastic Years Ending August 31, 1899, and August 31, 1900. Austin: Von Boeckmann, Moore & Schutze State Printers, 1900.
Kendrick, Paul and Stephen Kendrick. Sarah’s Long Walk: The Free Blacks of Boston and How Their Struggle for Equality Changed America. Boston: Beacon Press, 2004.
Kennedy, Randall. "Martin Luther King's Constitution: A Legal History of the Montgomery Bus Boycott." Yale Law Journal 98 (1989): 999-1067.
Kennedy, John F., Lyndon B. Johnson, Hubert H. Humphrey, and Thomas H. Kuchel. Moral Crisis: The Case for Civil Rights. Minneapolis: Gilbert Publishing Company, 1964.
Kerber, Linda K. "The Meanings of Citizenship." The Journal of American History 84, no. 3 (1997): 833-54.
Kinch Jr., Sam. "Texas Again Leading South in Desegregation of Schools." Dallas Morning News, January 17, 1969. 120
Klarman, Michael J. "Brown, Racial Change, and the Civil Rights Movement." Virginia Law Review 80, no. 7 (1994): 7-150.
Kluger, Richard. Simple Justice: The History of Brown v. Board of Education and Black America's Struggle for Equality. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2004.
Kotz, Nick. Judgment Days: Lyndon Baines Johnson, Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Laws That Changed America. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2005.
Kozol, Jonathan. Savage Inequalities: Children in America's Schools. New York: Crown Publishers, Inc., 1991.
Krause, Jarol E. "Appendix V: Court History of the Desegregation Suits Involving DISD." Dallas: Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law Underwood Law Library, Litigation Archives Division, 1976.
Kreimer, Seth F. "Reading the Mind of School Board: Segregative Intent and the De Facto/ De Jure Distinction." Yale Law Journal 86, no. 2 (1976): 317-55.
Lack, Paul Dean. "Urban Slavery in the Southwest." PhD diss., Texas Tech University, 1982.
Ladino, Robyn Duff. Desegregating Texas Schools: Eisenhower, Shivers, and the Crisis at Mansfield High. Austin: University of Texas Press, 2010.
Ladson-Billings, Gloria. "Introduction." In Education Research in the Public Interest: Social Justice, Action, and Policy, edited by Gloria. Ladson-Billings and William F. Tate. Multicultural Education, 1-16. New York: Teachers College Press, 2006.
Lambert, Frank. The Battle of Ole Miss: Civil Rights v. States' Rights. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Landrum, Lynn. "Thinking Out Loud: Warren and the Law." Dallas Morning News, September 3, 1958.
Lassiter, Matthew D., and Andrew B. Lewis, eds. The Moderates' Dilemma: Massive Resistance to School Desegregation in Virginia. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1998.
Lay, Shawn, ed. The Invisible Empire in the West: Toward a New Historical Appraisal of the Ku Klux Klan of the 1920s. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 2004.
Lefevre, Arthur. Thirteenth Biennial Report of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction for the Scholastic Years Ending August 31, 1901, and August 31, 1902. Austin: Von Boeckmann-Jones Company State Printers, 1903.
121
Leibowitz, Arnold H. "Educational Policy and Political Acceptance: The Imposition of English as the Language of Instruction in American Schools." Washington: Center for Applied Linguistics, 1971.
Leiding, Darlene. The Hows and Whys of Alternative Education: Schools Where Students Thrive Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Education 2008.
Leslie, Warren. Dallas Public and Private: Aspects of an American City. Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1998.
Leuchtenburg, William E. The White House Looks South: Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman, Lyndon B. Johnson. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2005.
Levine, Peter, and Rose Marie Nierras. "’Activists’ Views of Deliberation." Journal of Public Deliberation 2, no. 1 (2007): 1-14.
Lincoln, C. Eric, and Lawrence H. Mamiya. The Black Church in the African American Experience. Durham: Duke University Press, 1990.
Linden, Glenn M. Desegregating Schools in Dallas: Four Decades in the Federal Courts. Dallas: Three Forks Press, 1995.
Loevy, Robert D. "’To Write It in the Book of Law’: President Lyndon B. Johnson and the Civil Rights Act of 1964." In Lyndon Baines Johnson and the Uses of Power, edited by Bernard J. Firestone and Robert C. Vogt, 105-27. New York: Greenwood Press, 1988.
"Louisiana's Pupil Placement Outlawed; Texas Effect Eyed." Dallas Morning News, 1962.
Lowry, James H. and Associates. "Guide to Magnet School Development." edited by United States Department of Education: Office of Planning, Budget, and Evaluation. Washington: United States Department of Education, 1983.
Luban, David. "Difference Made Legal: The Court and Dr. King." Michigan Law Review 87, no. 8 (1989): 2152-224.
Lynch, Dudley. The President from Texas: Lyndon Baines Johnson. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company 1975.
Manis, Andrew M. A Fire You Can't Put Out: The Civil Rights Life of Birmingham's Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 2001.
Manuel, Herschel Thurman Spanish Speaking Children of the Southwest, Their Education and the Public Welfare. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1965.
Manuel, Hershel T., and Carrie E. Wright. "The Language Difficulty of Mexican Children." The Pedagogical Seminary and Journal of Genetic Psychology 36, no. 3 (1929): 458-468. 122
Marable, Manning, and Leith Mullings. Let Nobody Turn Us Around: Voices of Resistance, Reform, and Renewal. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003.
Marrs, S.M.N. The Twenty-Sixth Biennial Report State Department of Education 1928-1930 No. 282 Vol., VII, No.3. Austin: Von Boeckmann-Jones Co., 1931.
Marshall, Thurgood. "The Rise and Collapse of the ‘White Democratic Primary.’" The Journal of Negro Education 26, no. 3 (1957): 249-54.
Mathews, John Mabry. Legislative and Judicial History of the Fifteenth Amendment. Vol. 27. The Lawbook Exchange, 2001.
Matovina, Timothy, Jesús F. De La Teja, and Justin Poché, eds. Recollections of a Tejano Life: Antonio Menchaca in Texas History. Austin: University of Texas Press, 2013.
Maxwell, Lisa C. "Dallas County." Handbook of Texas Online. Uploaded on June 2, 2010, accessed March 09, 2015. http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/hcd02.
Mayer, Robert H. "Introduction." In The Civil Rights Act of 1964, edited by Robert H. Mayer. Opposing Viewpoints Series: At Issue in History. Farmington Hills: Greenhaven Press, 2004.
McElhaney Jackie, and Michael V. Hazel, "Dallas, TX." Handbook of Texas Online. Uploaded on June 12, 2010, accessed January 04, 2015. http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/hdd01.
McKenzie, Phyllis. The Mexican Texans. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2004.
McMillen, Neil R. The Citizens' Council: Organized Resistance to the Second Reconstruction, 1954-64. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1994.
McWhorter, Diane. Carry Me Home: Birmingham, Alabama: The Climactic Battle of the Civil Rights Revolution. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2001.
Meier, August, Elliott M. Rudwick, and Francis L. Broderick. Black Protest Thought in the Twentieth Century. American Heritage. 2nd ed. Vol. 56. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1971.
Melosi, Martin V. "Dallas-Forth Worth: Marketing the Metroplex." In Sunbelt Cities: Politics and Growth Since World War II, edited by Richard M. Bernard and Bradley R. Rice, 162-195. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1983.
Mercer, Bill. "Gunman, Mob, and Mourners." In When the News Went Live: Dallas 1963, edited by Bob Huffaker, Bill Mercer, George Phenix and Wes Wise, 90-107. Lanham: Taylor Trade Publishing, 2013.
Metz, Haywood. Different by Design: The Context and Character of Three Magnet Schools. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986. 123
Meyers, Joan, ed. John Fitzgerald Kennedy: As We Remember Him. New York: Atheneum Books, 1965.
Mickey, Robert W. "The Beginning of the End for Authoritarian Rule in America: Smith v. Allwright and the Abolition of the White Primary in the Deep South, 1944-1948." Studies in American Political Development 22, no. 2 (2008): 143-82.
Miller, Merle, and Lyndon Baines Johnson. Lyndon, an Oral Biography. New York: Putnam Publishers, 1980.
Minutaglio, Bill, and Steven L. Davis. Dallas 1963. New York: Twelve Hachette Book Group, 2013.
Mohl, Raymond A. "Race and Housing in the Postwar City: An Explosive History." Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society (1998-) 94, no. 1 (2001): 8-30.
Morehead, Richard M. "Segregation Ban May Affect 6 School Districts in Texas." Dallas Morning News, 1954.
———. "Integration--1: Mixing Lag in Schools." Dallas Morning News, November 30, 1958.
———. "Segregation Plan Made for Schools: Integration Allowed by Vote." Dallas Morning News, 1956.
Morowski, Deborah Lynn. "Prevailing over Prejudice: A Story of Race, Inequity, and Education in Gonzales, Texas." PhD. diss., University of Texas at Austin, 2008.
Moss, Marquita. "Dual Systems Generally Abolished in Texas: Large City School Districts Lag in Desegregation." Dallas Express, July 1967.
Moye, J. Todd. Let the People Decide: Black Freedom and White Resistance Movements in Sunflower County, Mississippi, 1945-1986. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2004.
Myrdal, Gunnar. An American Dilemma, Volume 2: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy. Vol. 2. Livingston: Transaction Publishers, 1944.
"Negro Clergyman Served at Downtown Lunch Counters." Dallas Express, April 30, 1960, 1, 8.
Neild, Ruth C. "The Effects of Magnet Schools on Neighborhood High Schools: An Examination of Achievement among Entering Freshmen." Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk 9, no. 1 (2004): 1-21.
Nevins, Allan, and John F. Kennedy, eds. The Burden and the Glory: The Hopes and Purposes of President Kennedy's Second and Third Years in Office as Revealed in His Public Statements and Addresses. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1964.
124
Ninth Biennial Report of the Board of Education of the Dallas Public Schools. Dallas: Published by Authority, 1902.
Noblit, George W. and Jason Mendez. "Legacies of Brown Versus Board: An Introduction to the Special Issue." The Urban Review 40, no. 1 (2008): 1-4.
Nossiter, Adam. Of Long Memory: Mississippi and the Murder of Medgar Evers. Cambridge: Da Capo Press, 2009.
Ogbar, Jeffrey O.G. Black Power: Radical Politics and African American Identity. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004.
Ogletree, Charles J. All Deliberate Speed: Reflections on the First Half Century of Brown v. Board of Education. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2004.
Oppenheimer, David Benjamin. "Martin Luther King, Walker v. City of Birmingham, and the Letter from Birmingham Jail." University of California Davis Law Review 26 (1992): 791.
Orfield, Gary. "Schools More Separate: Consequences of a Decade of Resegregation." Cambridge: Harvard Civil Rights Project, 2001.
Orfield, Gary, and Susan E. Eaton. Dismantling Desegregation: The Quiet Reversal of Brown v. Board of Education. New York: The New Press, 1996.
Parker, Jasmine Danielle "From Slavery to Equal Protection: The Misinterpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment and Its Lasting Effects on American Society." Master’s thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2010.
Parks, Scott K. "Extremists in Dallas Created Volatile Atmosphere before JFK’s 1963 Visit." Dallas Morning News, October 12, 2013.
Paterson, Thomas G. Kennedy's Quest for Victory: American Foreign Policy, 1961-1963. New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.
Patterson, James T., and William W. Freehling. Brown v. Board of Education: A Civil Rights Milestone and Its Troubled Legacy. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Payne, Darwin. Big D: Triumphs and Troubles of an American Supercity in the 20th Century. Dallas: Three Forks Press, 1994.
———. Quest for Justice: Louis A. Bedford Jr. And the Struggle for Equal Rights in Texas. Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 2009.
———. "Darwin Payne." In Where Were You?: America Remembers the JFK Assassination, edited by Gus Russo and Harry Moses. Guilford: Lyons Press, 2013.
125
Perales, Monica, and Raul A. Ramos, eds. Recovering the Hispanic History of Texas. Houston: Arte Publico Press, 2010.
Pettigrew, Thomas. "The Cold Structural Inducements to Integration." The Urban Review 8, no. 2 (1975): 137-44.
Pettigrew, Thomas F., and Robert L. Green. "School Desegregation in Large Cities: A Critique of the Coleman ‘White Flight’ Thesis." Harvard Educational Review 46, no. 1 (1976): 1-53.
Phenix, George. "Moving with the Story." In When the News Went Live: Dallas 1963, edited by Bob Huffaker, Bill Mercer, George Phenix and Wes Wise. Lanham: Taylor Trade Publishing, 2004.
Phillips, Joseph Michael. "The Fire This Time: The Battle over Racial, Regional and Religious Identities in Dallas, Texas, 1860-1990." PhD. diss., University of Texas at Austin, 2002.
Phillips, Michael. "Dallas: Civic, Literary, and Mutual Aid Associations." In Organizing Black America: An Encyclopedia of African American Associations, edited by Nina Mjagkij. New York: Routledge, 2013.
———. White Metropolis: Race, Ethnicity, and Religion in Dallas, 1841-2001. Austin: University of Texas Press, 2006.
Pitre, Merline. Through Many Dangers, Toils and Snares: Black Leadership in Texas, 1868-1900. Austin: Eakin Press, 1985.
Posner, Gerald. Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK. New York: Random House, 1993.
Pryor, Jacqueline Denise. "An Exploration of Personal Financial Behavior of College-Educated Black Women in the Midwest." PhD. diss., Iowa State University, 2010.
Ramos, Lisa Y. "Dismantling Segregation Together: Interconnections between the Mendez v. Westminster (1946) and Brown v. Board of Education (1954) School Segregation Cases." Equity & Excellence in Education 37, no. 3 (2004): 247-54.
Ravitch, Diane and Joseph P. Viteritti. "Introduction." In New Schools for a New Century: The Redesign of Urban Education, edited by Diane Ravitch and Joseph P. Viteritti. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997.
Read, Frank T. "Judicial Evolution of the Law of School Integration since Brown v. Board of Education." Law and Contemporary Problems 39, no. 1 (1975): 7-49.
Reardon, Sean F., Elena Grewal, Demetra Kalogrides, and Erica Greenberg. "Brown Fades: The End of Court-Ordered School Desegregation and the Resegregation of American Public Schools." Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 31, no. 4 (2011): 876-904.
126
Requite, Patsy. "Black Teachers Air Compaints at Tri-Ethnic Committee Meeting." Audio recording. Dallas: Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law Underwood Law Library, Litigation Archives Division, 1973.
Rice, Dale. "Changing Student Ethnicity in DISD." Dallas Times Herald, April 11, 1982.
Rodriguez, Marc S. The Tejano Diaspora: Mexican Americanism & Ethnic Politics in Texas and Wisconsin. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2011.
Rogers, C. O. "Letters from Readers: Education for Negroes." Dallas Express, 1941.
Rogers, Kim Lacy. "Oral History and the History of the Civil Rights Movement." The Journal of American History 75, no. 2 (1988): 567-76.
———. Righteous Lives: Narratives of the New Orleans Civil Rights Movement. New York: New York University Press, 1994.
Rohrich, Rod J, Purushottam Nagarkar, Mike Stokes, and Aaron Weinstein. "The Assassination of John F. Kennedy: Revisiting the Medical Data." Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 132, no. 5 (2013): 1340-50.
Rose, Harriett DeAnn. "Dallas, Poverty, and Race: Community Action Programs." Master’s thesis, University of Noth Texas, 2008.
Rouse, Roger. "Mexican Migration and the Social Space of Postmodernism." Diaspora: A Journal of Transnational Studies 1, no. 1 (1991): 8-23.
Sales, William W. From Civil Rights to Black Liberation: Malcolm X and the Organization of Afro- American Unity. Cambridge: South End Press, 1994.
Salter Jr., John R. Jackson, Mississippi: An American Chronicle of Struggle and Schism. Hicksville: Exposition Press, 1979.
San Miguel Jr., Guadalupe. Brown, Not White: School Integration and the Chicano Movement in Houston. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2005.
———. " Let All of Them Take Heed": Mexican Americans and the Campaign for Educational Equality in Texas, 1910-1981. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1987.
Schlesinger, Arthur M. A Thousand Days: John F. Kennedy in the White House. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2002.
Schutze, Jim. The Accommodation: The Politics of Race in an American City. Secaucus: Citadel Press, 1986.
127
Schuyler, Michael W. "Ghosts in the White House: LBJ, RFK and the Assassination of JFK." Presidential Studies Quarterly 17, no. 3 (1987): 503-18.
Scott, Douglas. Letter. September 19, 1975.
"September 26, 1937." Newspaper article. Dallas Times Herald, 1937.
Seventeenth Biennial Report of the State Department of Education for the Years Ending August 31, 1909, and August 31, 1910. Austin: Austin Printing Co., 1911.
Sheatsley, Paul B., and Jacob J. Feldman. "The Assassination of President Kennedy: A Preliminary Report on Public Reactions and Behavior." Public Opinion Quarterly 28, no. 2 (1964): 189-215.
Siegel, Reva B. "She the People: The Nineteenth Amendment, Sex Equality, Federalism, and the Family." Harvard Law Review 115, no. 4 (2002): 947-1046.
Silver, James W. "Mississippi: The Closed Society." The Journal of Southern History 30, no. 1 (1964): 3-34.
Sinclair, T.C., and Werner F. Grunbaum. Personal Rights and Liberties: The Constitution of Texas with Its 140 Patches. Arnold Foundation Monographs. Dallas: Southern Methodist University, 1960.
Skipper, Jodi. “’In the neighborhood’: City Planning, Archeology, and Cultural Heritage Politics at St. Paul United Methodist Church, Dallas, Texas.” PhD diss., The University of Texas at Austin, 2010.
Slate, John H. Historic Dallas Parks. Charleston: Arcadia Publishing, 2010.
Smallwood, James. The Struggle for Equality: Blacks in Texas. Boston: American Press, 1983.
Smith, Foster Todd. From Dominance to Disappearance: The Indians of Texas and the near Southwest, 1786-1859. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2005.
Smrekar, Claire and Ellen Goldring. "Magnet Schools, MSAP, and New Opportunities to Promote Diversity." In Integrating Schools in a Changing Society: New Policies and Legal Options for a Multiracial Generation edited by Erika Frankenberg and Elizabeth Debray, 232-40. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2011.
"'Sorry--Tea Room Not Integrated'; Sees No Immediate Change in Policy." Dallas Express, May 7, 1960.
Span, Christopher M. "Citizen or Laborer?: The Social Purposed of Black Schooling in Reconstruction Mississippi, 1862-1875." PhD. diss., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2001.
128
———. ""I Must Learn Now or Not at All": Social and Cultural Capital in the Educational Initiatives of Formerly Enslaved African Americans in Mississippi, 1862-1869." The Journal of African American History 87 (2002): 196-205.
———. "Knowledge Is Light, Knowledge Is Power: African American Education in Antebellum America." In Surmounting All Odds: Education, Opportunity and Society in the New Millenium. Greenwich: Information Age, 2003.
———. From Cotton Field to Schoolhouse: African American Education in Mississippi, 1862-1875. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2009.
Span, Christopher M., and James D. Anderson. "The Quest for ‘Book Learning’: African American Education in Slavery and Freedom." In A Companion to African American History edited by Alton Hornsby Jr., 295- 311. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2005.
Spring, Joel. The Sorting Machine Revisited: National Educational Policy since 1945. New York: Longman Inc., 1989.
Star, Harold. Your Dallas of Tomorrow: A Master Plan for a Greater Dallas- Report Number One: Character of the City. St. Louis: Harland Bartholomew and Associates, 1943, 8.
"State Fair of Texas: Marion Butts Collection." Dallas: Texas/Dallas History & Archives Division.
Stern, Mark. "John F. Kennedy and Civil Rights: From Congress to the Presidency." Presidential Studies Quarterly 19, no. 4 (1989): 797-823.
Still, Rae Files. The Gilmer-Aikin Bills: A Study in the Legislative Process. Austin: Steck Company, 1950.
Strong, Donald S. "The Rise of Negro Voting in Texas." The American Political Science Review 42, no. 3 (1948): 510-22.
Stroud, Virgil C. In Quest of Freedom. Dallas: Royal Publishing Company, 1963.
Stutz, Terrence. "White Flight Blamed for Loss of Students." Dallas Morning News, May 1, 1981.
Sugrue, Thomas J. Sweet Land of Liberty: The Forgotten Struggle for Civil Rights in the North. New York: Random House, 2008.
"Suprise--Discrimination!" Dallas Express, December 28, 1970.
Swanson, James L. The President Has Been Shot: The Assassination of John F. Kennedy. New York: Scholastic Press, 2013.
Taylor, Edward, David Gillborn, and Gloria Ladson-Billings. Foundations of Critical Race Theory in Education. New York: Routledge, 2009. 129
Taylor Jr., William M. "Civil Docket." In Tasby et al. v. Estes et al., edited by United States District Court. Dallas: United States District Court, October 30, 1970.
———."Judge Taylor's Personal Research Questions Pertaining to Tasby v. Estes." Dallas: Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, Litigation Archives Division, 1974.
———. "Order with Regard to Majority-to-Minority Transfer Policy " In CA 3-4211-C, edited by Dallas Division United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. Dallas: Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law library, Litigations Archive Division, September 1971.
———. "Tasby et al. vs. Estes et al. Memorandum Opinion." In CA 3-4211-C, edited by Dallas Division United States District Court For the Northern District of Texas, 1-5. Dallas: Judge William M. Taylor, July 16, 1971.
———. "Tasby et al. vs. Estes et al. Judgment." In CA 3-4211-C, edited by Dallas Division United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, 1-7. Dallas: Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, Litigation Archives Division, August 2, 1971.
Telgen, Diane. Defining Moments: Brown v. Board of Education. Detroit: Omnigraphics, Inc., 2005.
Terrill, Robert. Malcolm X: Inventing Radical Judgment. Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 2004.
Texas Almanac, “Texas Almanac: City Population History from 1850-2000.” Accessed March 9, 2015. http://www.texasalmanac.com/sites/default/files/images/CityPopHist%20web.pdf.
Texas Education Agency, 1960-1962 Biennial Report. Austin: Texas Education Agency, 1963.
The School Desegregation in Texas Policy Research Project. "School Desegregation in Texas: The Implementation of United States v. State of Texas." Austin: Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at The University of Texas at Austin, 1982.
The Twenty-Seventh Biennial Report State Department of Education: 1930-1932 No. 314 Vol. IX, No. 1. Austin: Von Boeckmann-Jones Co., 1933.
Thirteenth Biennial Report of the Dallas Public Schools. Dallas: Published by Authority, 1910.
Thomas, Robert. "Longest and Largest-Judge Sanders and the Tasby Case." SMU Law Review 62, no. Special Issue (2009): 1737-40.
Thometz, Carol Estes. The Decision-Makers: The Power Structure of Dallas. Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963.
130
Thurmond, Strom. "Declaration of Constitutional Principles." Washington: Congressional Record, March 12, 1956.
———. "The ‘Southern Manifesto.’" Congressional Record 102 (1956): 4515-4516.
"Tillman on Caste- South Carolina Senator's Remarks in the Senate on Feb. 24 Last: Prejudice in North as Much Feeling against the Negro in One Section as in Another." Dallas Times Herald, February 26, 1903.
Tollett, Kenneth S. "Review: Untitled." Journal of Negro Education 68, no. 2 (1999): 227-36.
Tower, Senator John. "The Senator on Busing " Dallas Morning News, 1978.
Tozer, Steven, Paul C. Violas, and Guy B. Senese. School and Society: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006.
Trujillo, Nick. "Interpreting November 22: A Critical Ethnography of an Assassination Site." Quarterly Journal of Speech 79, no. 4 (1993): 447-66.
United States Census Bureau. “Historical Census Statistics on Population Totals by Race, 1790-1990, and by Hispanic Origin, 1970-1990, for the U.S., Regions, Divisions, and States- Texas Race and Hispanic Origin Table." Accessed March 9, 2015. HTTP://statistical.proquest.com.proxy2.library.illinois.edu/statisticalinsight/result/pqpresultpage. previewtitle?docType=PQSI-TABLE&titleUri=%2Ftable%2F2002%2F2626-13- 57%2FTBL58.xml.
———. “Census of Population and Housing.” Accessed March 9, 2015. https://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html.
———. “Texas: Chapter 1.—Number of Inhabitants.” Accessed March 10, 2015. http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/36894832v3ch6.pdf.
United State Census Office. Census Reports Volume II: Twelfth Census of the United States, Taken in the Year 1900- Population Part II Prepared Under the Supervision of William A. King. Washington: Department of the Interior, 1900.
———. Census Reports Volume I: Twelfth Census of the United States, Taken in the Year 1900- Population Part I. Washington: Department of the Interior, 1901.
United States Department of Commerce. Fifteenth Census of the United States: 1930- Population Volume II, Part 2 Montana-Wyoming. Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1932.
———. A Report of the Seventeenth Decennial Census of the United States- Census of Population: 1950 Volume II, Characteristics of the Population Number of Inhabitants, General and Detailed 131
Characteristics of the Population. Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1952.
United States Department of Commerce and Labor Bureau of the Census. Thirteenth Census of the United States Taken in the Year 1910- Statistics for Texas Containing Statistics of Population, Agriculture, Manufactures, and Mining for the States, Counties, Cities, and other Divisions. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1913.
United States Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census. Fourteenth Census of the United States Taken in the Year 1920: Volume III Population- Composition and Characteristics of the Population by States. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1922.
———. Sixteenth Census of the United States: 1940 Population Volume IV- Characteristics by Age Marital Status, Relationship, Education, and Citizenship Part IV: Ohio-Wyoming. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1943.
United States Government, Warren Commission. Report of the President's Commission on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Washington: US Government Printing Office, 1964.
United States House of Representatives. "EBJ's Biography." Washington: United States Government, http://ebjohnson.house.gov/about/full-biography.
Valdes, Francisco, Jerome McCristal Culp, and Angela Harris. Crossroads, Directions and a New Critical Race Theory. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2002.
Viteritti, Joseph P. Choosing Equality: School Choice, the Constitution, and Civil Society. Washington: Brookings Institution Press, 1999.
Walker, Vanessa Siddle. Their Highest Potential: An African American School Community in the Segregated South. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1996.
———. "Valued Segregated Schools for African American Children in the South, 1935-1969: A Review of Common Themes and Characteristics." Review of Educational Research 70, no. 3 (2000): 253-85.
Ward, Jason M. Defending White Democracy: The Making of a Segregationist Movement and the Remaking of Racial Politics, 1936-1965. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2011.
Warner, C.A. Texas Oil & Gas Since 1543. Ingleside: Copano Bay Press, 2007.
West, Richard. "The Texas Monthly Reporter." Texas Monthly Magazine, May 1976, 17-18.
Wicker, Tom. "Kennedy Is Killed by Sniper as He Rides in Car in Dallas; Johnson Sworn in on Plane." New York Times, November 23, 1963. 132
Wiley, Nancy N. The Great State Fair of Texas: An Illustrated History. Dallas: Taylor Publishing Company, 1985.
Wilkins, Roy. "The Conspiracy to Deny Equality." In Forty-Six Annual NAACP Convention. Atlantic City: National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, 1955.
Willoughby, Larry. Texas, Our Texas. Orlando: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1993.
Wilson, Anna Victoria, and William E. Segall. Oh, Do I Remember!: Experiences of Teachers during the Desegregation of Austin's Schools, 1964-1971. Albany: State University of New York, 2001.
Wilson, Steven H. "Brown over ‘Other White’: Mexican Americans' Legal Arguments and Litigation Strategy in School Desegregation Lawsuits." Law and History Review 21, no. 1 (2003): 145-94.
Wilson, William H. Hamilton Park: A Planned Black Community in Dallas. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998.
Winegarten, Ruthe. Black Texas Women: 150 Years of Trial and Triumph. Austin: University of Texas Press, 2010.
Wintz, Cary D. "The Struggle for Dignity: African Americans in Twentieth Century Texas." In Twentieth-Century Texas: A Social and Cultural History, edited by John Woodrow Storey and Mary L. Kelley, 69-104. Denton: University of North Texas Press, 2008.
Wise, Wes. "The Media, Extremists, and Dallas." In When the News Went Live: Dallas 1963, edited by Bob Huffaker, Bill Mercer, George Phenix and Wes Wise. Lanham: Taylor Trade Publishing, 2004.
Wollenberg, C. All Deliberate Speed: Segregation and Exclusion in California Schools, 1855-1975. University of California Press, 1978.
———. "Mendez v. Westminster: Race, Nationality and Segregation in California Schools." California Historical Quarterly 53, no. 4 (1974): 317-32.
Zamora, Emilio, Cynthia Orozco, and Rodolfo Rocha, eds. Mexican Americans in Texas History: Selected Essays. Austin: Texas State Historical Association, 2000.
Zelden, Charles L. The Battle for the Black Ballot: Smith v. Allwright and the Defeat of the Texas All- White Primary. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2004.
Zeskind, Leonard. Blood and Politics: The History of the White Nationalist Movement from the Margins to the Mainstream. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2009.
Zirbel, Craig I. The Texas Connection: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Scottsdale: Texas Connection Company Publishers, 1991. 133
APPENDIX
TABLES
The following tables are reflective of the demographic data pertaining to the State of
Texas and the City of Dallas. These tables detail the population of both the state and the city, as well as the population of racial subgroups. Additionally, school-age population and attendance data is also provided. Tables one through fifteen coincide with the information found in chapter two. Table sixteen is reflective of the racial demographical transformation of the Dallas
Independent School District overtime, beginning in 1955. This table offers a visual synopsis of the (de)segregation information found in chapter five. 134
TABLE 1
TABLE 1: STATE OF TEXAS DEMOGRAPHICS, 1900-1950206
DECADE TOTAL STATE STATE OF TEXAS WHITE STATE OF TEXAS “NEGRO”
POPULATION POPULATION (RACE) POPULATION (RACE)
1900 3,048,710 2,426,669 620,722
1910 3,896,542 3,204,848 690,049
1920 4,663,228 3,918,165 741,694
1930 5,824,715 4,967,172 854,964
1940 6,414,824 5,253,157 924,391
1950 7,711,194 6,726,534 977,458
206 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, “Historical Census Statistics on Population Totals by Race, 1790-1990, and by Hispanic Origin, 1970-1990, for the U.S., Regions, Divisions, and States” Texas- Race and Hispanic Origin Table no.058, Record Number: 2002 ASI 2626-13.57 HTTP://statistical.proquest.com.proxy2.library.illinois.edu/statisticalinsight/result/pqpresultpage.previewtitle?docType=PQSI- TABLE&titleUri=%2Ftable%2F2002%2F2626-13-57%2FTBL58.xml (accessed March 9, 2015). 135
TABLE 2
TABLE 2: CITY OF DALLAS DEMOGRAPHICS, 1900-1950207
DECADE TOTAL CITY OF DALLAS CITY OF DALLAS WHITE CITY OF DALLAS “NEGRO”
POPULATION POPULATION (RACE) POPULATION (RACE)
1900 42,639 33,575 9,035
1910 92,104 74,043 18,024
1920 210,551 179,062 31,397
1930 260,475 210,720 38,742
1940 294,734 244,246 50,407
1950 434,462 354,539 79,923
207 Sources: Campbell Gibson and Kay Jung, “Population Division: Historical Census Statistics on Population Totals by Race, 1790 to 1990, and by Hispanic Origin, 1970 to 1990, for the United States, Regions, Divisions, and States” (U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, 2002); US Census Bureau, “Census of Population and Housing” https://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html (accessed March 9, 2015); US Census Bureau, “Population of the 100 Largest Urban Places: 1950” https://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0027/tab18.txt (accessed March 9, 2015); and Texas Almanac, “Texas Almanac: City Population History from 1850-2000” http://www.texasalmanac.com/sites/default/files/images/CityPopHist%20web.pdf (accessed March 9, 2015). 136
TABLE 3
TABLE 3: GENERAL STATE OF TEXAS AND CITY OF DALLAS DEMOGRAPHICS, 1900208
TOTAL STATE OF TOTAL WHITE TOTAL TOTAL CITY OF TOTAL WHITE TOTAL
TEXAS POPULATION “COLORED” DALLAS POPULATION “COLORED”
POPULATION (STATE) POPULATION POPULATION (CITY) POPULATION
(STATE) (CITY)
3,048,710 2,426,669 620,722 42,639 33,575 9,035
208 Source: United States Census Office, “Census Reports Volume I: Twelfth Census of the United States, Taken in the Year 1900- Population Part I” (Washington: Department of the Interior, 1901). 137
TABLE 4
TABLE 4: GENERAL STATE OF TEXAS AND CITY OF DALLAS DEMOGRAPHICS, 1910209
TOTAL STATE OF TOTAL WHITE TOTAL TOTAL CITY OF TOTAL WHITE TOTAL
TEXAS POPULATION “COLORED” DALLAS POPULATION “COLORED”
POPULATION (STATE) POPULATION POPULATION (CITY) POPULATION
(STATE) (CITY)
3,896,542 3,204,848 690,049 92,104 74,043 18,024
209 Source: Department of Commerce and Labor Bureau of the Census, “Thirteenth Census of the United States Taken in the Year 1910- Statistics for Texas Containing Statistics of Population, Agriculture, Manufactures, and Mining for the States, Counties, Cities, and other Divisions” (Department of Labor, Washington, 1913). 138
TABLE 5
TABLE 5: GENERAL STATE OF TEXAS AND CITY OF DALLAS DEMOGRAPHICS, 1920210
TOTAL STATE OF TOTAL WHITE TOTAL TOTAL CITY OF TOTAL WHITE TOTAL
TEXAS POPULATION “COLORED” DALLAS POPULATION “COLORED”
POPULATION (STATE) POPULATION POPULATION (CITY) POPULATION
(STATE) (CITY)
4,663,228 3,918,165 741,694 210,551 179,062 31,397
210 Source: Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census, “Fourteenth Census of the United States Taken in the Year 1920: Volume III Population- Composition and Characteristics of the Population by States” (Department of Commerce, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1922). 139
TABLE 6
TABLE 6: GENERAL STATE OF TEXAS AND CITY OF DALLAS DEMOGRAPHICS, 1930211
TOTAL STATE OF TOTAL WHITE TOTAL “NEGRO” TOTAL CITY OF TOTAL WHITE TOTAL “NEGRO”
TEXAS POPULATION POPULATION DALLAS POPULATION POPULATION
POPULATION (STATE) (STATE) POPULATION (CITY) (CITY)
5,824,715 4,967,172 854,964 260,475 210,720 38,742
211 Source: US Department of Commerce, “Fifteenth Census of the United States: 1930- Population Volume II, Part 2 Montana-Wyoming (Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1932). 140
TABLE 7
TABLE 7: GENERAL STATE OF TEXAS AND CITY OF DALLAS DEMOGRAPHICS, 1940212
TOTAL STATE OF TOTAL WHITE TOTAL “NEGRO” TOTAL CITY OF TOTAL WHITE TOTAL “NEGRO”
TEXAS POPULATION POPULATION DALLAS POPULATION POPULATION
POPULATION (STATE) (STATE) POPULATION (CITY) (CITY)
6,414,824 5,253,157 924,391 294,734 244,246 50,407
212 Source: US Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census, “Sixteenth Census of the United States: 1940 Population Volume IV- Characteristics by Age Marital Status, Relationship, Education, and Citizenship Part IV: Ohio-Wyoming” (United States Department of Commerce, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1943). 141
TABLE 8
TABLE 8: GENERAL STATE OF TEXAS AND CITY OF DALLAS DEMOGRAPHICS, 1950213
TOTAL STATE OF TOTAL WHITE TOTAL TOTAL CITY OF TOTAL WHITE TOTAL
TEXAS POPULATION “NONWHITE” DALLAS POPULATION “NONWHITE”
POPULATION (STATE) POPULATION POPULATION (CITY) POPULATION
(STATE) (CITY)
7,711,194 6,726,534 977,458 434,462 354,539 79,923
213 Source: US Department of Commerce, “A Report of the Seventeenth Decennial Census of the United States- Census of Population: 1950 Volume II, Characteristics of the Population Number of Inhabitants, General and Detailed Characteristics of the Population (Washington: United States Government Printing Office: 1952). 142
TABLE 9
TABLE 9: STATE OF TEXAS SCHOOL ATTENDANCE DEMOGRAPHICS, 1900-1950214
DECADE TOTAL NUMBER OF TEXANS NUMBER OF SCHOOL-AGED TEXANS PERCENTAGE OF SCHOOL-
AGED 5-19, INCLUSIVE ATTENDING SCHOOL AGED TEXANS ATTENDING
SCHOOL
1900 1,149,579 510,439 44.4 %
1910 1,388,716 790,074 56.9 %
1920 1,606,365 974,165 60.6 %
1930 1,872,032 1,221,141 65.2 %
1940215 1,856,968 1,308,326 70.5 %
1950 1,949,980 1,384,900 71.0 %
214 Sources: Department of Commerce and Labor Bureau of the Census, “Thirteenth Census of the United States Taken in the Year 1910: Statistics for Texas Containing Statistics of Population, Agriculture, Manufactures, and Mining for the State, Counties, Cities, and other Divisions” (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1910), 598; US Department of Commerce, “Fifteenth Census of the United States: 1930- Population Volume II, Part 2 Montana-Wyoming (Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1932), 942-974; US Department of Commerce, “A Report of the Seventeenth Decennial Census of the United States- Census of Population: 1950 Volume II, Characteristics of the Population Number of Inhabitants, General and Detailed Characteristics of the Population (Washington: United States Government Printing Office: 1952), 64-69.
215 Beginning with the 1940 United States Census, the school-aged demographic changed. In previous census data the school-age population accounted for all children aged 5-20. However, the 1940 census data redistributed the school-aged demographic to better reflect early education and higher education students. Thus, the 1940 estimate of school aged Texans reflect the population of Texans aged 5-24 years. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, “Volume 2. Characteristics of the Population: Part 6. Pennsylvania-Texas” https://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html (accessed March 9, 2015). 143
TABLE 10
TABLE 10: CITY OF DALLAS SCHOOL ATTENDANCE DEMOGRAPHICS, 1900216
CITY OF NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE
DALLAS STUDENTS OF “SCHOOL OF “SCHOOL “SCHOOL OF “SCHOOL
POPULATION “WITHIN DALLASITES AGED” AGED” WHITE AGED” AGED”
AGED 5-19 SCHOOL AGE” “WITHIN WHITE DALLASITES “COLORED” “COLORED”
ATTENDING SCHOOL AGE” DALLASITES ATTENDING DALLASITES DALLASITES
SCHOOL ATTENDING ATTENDING SCHOOL ATTENDING ATTENDING
SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL
12,485 6,950 55.7 % 6,074 49 % 876 35.6 %
216 Sources: United State Census Office, “Census Reports Volume II: Twelfth Census of the United States, Taken in the Year 1900- Population Part II Prepared Under the Supervision of William A. King” (Department of the Interior, Washington, 1900), 127; 352-394; “Ninth Biennial Report of the Board of Education of the Dallas public Schools” (Published by Authority: Dallas, 1902), 13; J.S. Kendall, “Twelfth Biennial report of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction for the Scholastic Years Ending August 31, 1899, and August 31, 1900” (Von Boeckmann, Moore & Schutze State Printers, Austin, 1900), 155-165. 144
TABLE 11
TABLE 11: CITY OF DALLAS SCHOOL ATTENDANCE DEMOGRAPHICS, 1910217
CITY OF NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE
DALLAS STUDENTS OF WHITE OF WHITE “COLORED” OF “COLORED”
POPULATION AGED 6-20 DALLASITES DALLASITES DALLASITES DALLASITES DALLASITES
AGED 6-20 ATTENDING AGED 6-20 AGED 6-20 AGED 6-20 AGED 6-20 AGED 6-20
SCHOOL ATTENDING ATTENDING ATTENDING ATTENDING ATTENDING
SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL
15,673 13,181 84.1 % 10,670 75.0 % 2,511 68.6 %
217 Sources: “Thirteenth Biennial Report of the Dallas Public Schools” (Published by Authority: Dallas, 1910); F.M. Bralley, “Seventeenth Biennial Report of the State Department of Education for the Years Ending August 31, 1909, and August 31, 1910” (Austin: Austin Printing Co., 1911), 410-418; U.S. Census Bureau, “Texas: Chapter 1.—Number of Inhabitants,” http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/36894832v3ch6.pdf (accessed March 10, 2015). 145
TABLE 12
TABLE 12: CITY OF DALLAS SCHOOL ATTENDANCE DEMOGRAPHICS, 1920218
CITY OF NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE
DALLAS STUDENTS OF WHITE OF WHITE “COLORED” OF
POPULATION AGED 6-20 DALLASITES DALLASITES DALLASITES DALLASITES “COLORED”
AGED 6-20 ATTENDING AGED 6-20 AGED 6-20 AGED 6-20 AGED 6-20 DALLASITES
SCHOOL ATTENDING ATTENDING ATTENDING ATTENDING AGED 6-20
SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL ATTENDING
SCHOOL
51,063 33,000 64.6 % 26,832 63 % 6,168 73 %
218 Source: Annie Webb Blanton, “Twenty-Second Biennial Report of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction State of Texas: School Sessions of 1920-21 and 1921-22” (State Board of Education, Austin: Von Boeckmann-Jones Co., 1923), 195-237. 146
TABLE 13
TABLE 13: CITY OF DALLAS SCHOOL ATTENDANCE DEMOGRAPHICS, 1930219
CITY OF NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE
DALLAS STUDENTS OF WHITE OF WHITE “NEGRO” OF “NEGRO”
POPULATION AGED 5-24 DALLASITES DALLASITES DALLASITES DALLASITES DALLASITES
AGED 5-24 ATTENDING AGED 5-24 AGED 5-24 AGED 5-24 AGED 5-24 AGED 5-23
SCHOOL ATTENDING ATTENDING ATTENDING ATTENDING ATTENDING
SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL
92,780 45,278 48.8 % 39,597 50.9 % 5,681 41.9 %
219 Sources: US Department of Commerce, “Fifteenth Census of the United States: 1930- Population Volume II, Part 2 Montana-Wyoming (Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1932); US Census Bureau “Fifteenth Census of the United States” http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/33973538v2p6ch9.pdf (accessed March 10, 2015). 147
TABLE 14
TABLE 14: CITY OF DALLAS SCHOOL ATTENDANCE DEMOGRAPHICS, 1940220
CITY OF NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE
DALLAS STUDENTS OF WHITE OF WHITE “NEGRO” OF “NEGRO”
POPULATION AGED 5-24 DALLASITES DALLASITES DALLASITES DALLASITES DALLASITES
AGED 5-24 ATTENDING AGED 5-24 AGED 5-24 AGED 5-24 AGED 5-24 AGED 5-24
SCHOOL ATTENDING ATTENDING ATTENDING ATTENDING ATTENDING
SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL
94,170 48,099 51.1 % 39,842 51.5 % 8,257 50.2 %
220 Source: US Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census, “Sixteenth Census of the United States: 1940 Population Volume IV- Characteristics by Age Marital Status, Relationship, Education, and Citizenship Part IV: Ohio-Wyoming” (United States Department of Commerce, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1943); US Census “Sixteenth Census of the United States” http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/33973538v2p6ch9.pdf (accessed March 10, 2015). 148
TABLE 15
TABLE 15: CITY OF DALLAS SCHOOL ATTENDANCE DEMOGRAPHICS, 1950221
CITY OF NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE
DALLAS STUDENTS OF WHITE OF WHITE “NONWHITE” OF
POPULATION AGED 6-20 DALLASITES DALLASITES DALLASITES DALLASITES “NONWHITE”
AGED 6-20 ATTENDING AGED 6-20 AGED 6-20 AGED 6-20 AGED 6-20 DALLASITES
SCHOOL ATTENDING ATTENDING ATTENDING ATTENDING AGED 6-20
SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL SCHOOL ATTENDING
SCHOOL
126,210 89,545 70.9 % 58,240 61.7 % 7,685 62.5 %
221 Source: Howard G. Brunsman, “A Report of the Seventeenth Decennial Census of the United States Census of Population: 1950 Volume II Characteristics of the Population Number of Inhabitants, General and detailed Characteristics of the Population- Part 43 Texas”, (U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1952), 207-382. 149
TABLE 16
TABLE 16: DALLAS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT RACIAL COMPOSITION, 1955-2013222
YEARS WHITE DALLASITES AFRICAN AMERICAN HISPANIC OTHER DALLASITES DALLASITES DALLASITES (ASIAN AMERICAN AND AMERICAN INDIAN)
1955-1956 83.4 % 16.6 % NOT AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE
1970-1971 57.4 % 33.7 % 8.5 % 0.4 %
1975-1976 41.3 % 44.8 % 13.2 % 0.7 %
1981-1982 27.8 % 49.9 % 20.7 % 1.6 %
2012-2013 4.6 % 23.8 % 69.5 % 2.1 %
222 William M. Taylor Jr., "Tasby v. Estes Legal Proceedings: Order with Regard to Majority-to-Minority Transfer Policy " in CA 3-4211-C, ed. Dallas Division United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Dallas: SMU Dedman School of Law: Underwood Law Library, Litigations Archive Division, September 1971).