The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1902-08-31
THE QUESTION OF WHITE
SUPPORT FOR NEGRO SCHOOLS
Argument that 1t Would Be Inexpedient to Divide
the School Fund Between the Races in
Proportion to Taxes Paid

Progressive Farmer in The Outlook.)
From several counties of the Black Belt
OF North Carolina within the last few
months there have come rumorS of a
popular demand for some plan for divid-
ing the school fund between the races in
the proportion of the amount of taxes
paid by each-the withdrawal of white
support from negro schools. Against this
suggested policy Gov. Aycock. ex-Gov-
ernor Jarvis and other educational lead
ers have squarely set their faces, risk
ing their own popularity in some degree
in defense of what they regard as right.
For it cannot be denied that there is an
element, not too small to deserve con-
sideration that does not approve of uni
versal education. Just now these men
are laying the greatest stress on the fact
that our newly adopted Constitutional
Amendment provides an educational
qualification for voters, and that the edu-
cation of the negro means his return to
political power-"the virtual undoing Of
the amendment they say. Moreover it
is shown that the whites now pay the
expense of their own public schools and
more than two-thirds of the cost of the
negro schools; it is asserted that the
entire amount is needed for the educa-
tion of white boys and girls.
Quite plausible and rather alluring ar
guments are these; it must be admitted
that they possess considerable force. And
yet a careful study of the problem will
show that even from an ultra Southern
standpoint, there are good grounds for
Governor Aycock's position-good reasons
for the belief that to abandon our time
honored policy for the one now proposed
would work injury to both races.
In the first place, it is probable that
the scheme is a will-o- -wisp; that it
could not be put into execution even if its
advocates were able to secure the repeal
of those provisions of our State Consti-
tuition that now conflict with it. For
learned lawyers believe that the Four
teenth Amendment TO the Constitution
of the United States presents obstacles
that could not be overcome
The righteousness of the measure may
also be questioned-as it was questioned
by an honored judge and Democratic
leader who said TO the writer recently:
1T would not be right, it would be I'M
worthy a strong Christian people, to
withhold the light from this weak and
needy race"
1t appears therefore, that in the con-
sideration of this scheme three questions
demand attention:
Is it constitutional?
Is it righteous?
Is il expedient?
In this article only the last of these
interrogatories shall have attention.
We believe that the proposed change
is ineXpedient because
1. 1t would destroy the foundation of
our public school system.
2. 1t would aggravate, not alleviate,
the Southern race problem.
AS to the first of these propositions:
The great bedrock truth on which our
scheme of public education is based is
that (the rank and power of peoples be-
ing in proportion to their intelligence)
ignorance wherever found, without re-
gard to sex or race or condition, is
inimical to the peace, progress, and pros
perity of the commonwealth; that it is,
like crime, the common enemy of all the
people, and that all must work together
for its suppression; that, as the State
can leave to no one class the punishment
of the criminals of that class, but must
itself assume the task of warning against
State must war against illiteracy, allow
ing the Indifference or incompetence of
no class to foster this enemy of the
general welfare.
Suppose we should allow the rich to
say to the poor, or the whites to the
blacks, Build your own jails, pay your
own judges, punish your own criminals;
what have we to do with crime in your
d., tl,o% e1a aha
the principle that crime is the common
enemy of all the people, to be controlled,
and punished by the State as the repre-
sentative of all the people. and pave the
way for virtual anarchy. So, when we
allow one race to say to another, Build
your own school houses, pay your own
teachers, educate your own children:
what have we TO do with ignorance in
your ranks?" We uproot the foundation
of our public-school system and pave the
way for anarchy in educational matters.
For if ignorance is not the common
enemy of white and black, how are we
to prove that it is the common enemy OF
rich and poor, or of Catholic and Protes-
tant. or of Baptist and Methodist, towns
man and countryfan? To illustrate: Sup
pose We let the Weather race now say
to the poorer race, We are tired of hay-
ing to pay taxes to educate your chill
dren. Take what is your own and edu-
cate your children; We will use our
money on our children" What then
should we answer-as Governor Aycock
suggested to the writer a few days ago
if ten years later the old aristoeratic
idea should show itself by the rich white
man saying to the poor white man, eff
it is not right TO compel a rich race to
aid the education of a poor race, neither
is it right TO compel a rich class to aid
the education of a poor class. | am tired
of paying taxes to educate your children;
educate your own and l will educate
NINE
Positively inevitable is the conclusion
that the adoption of the proposed policy
would mean the breaking up of the foun-
dation principle of our educational sys-
TEN. Who can say what the end would
be?
In the second place. as l have said,
the proposed change is inexpedient be-
cause lit would aggravate, not alleviate,
the Southern race problem" To put it
more plainly, it would produce a result
exactly contrary to that predicted by the
extremists who advocate it-just as