Minneapolis spokesman. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1934-2000, 1945-06-29

The case of Susie Morris and
Frances P. Hibbler was originally
filed February %, 1912, on behalf
of Negro teachers of Little Rock
against Russell Scobe, superinten-
dent of schools and the local school
board. After preliminary motions
were disposed of, full trial on the
merits began September %, 1912,
and concluded October 3, 1912.
During the trial the plaintiff and
other Negroes testified as to their
qualifications and experience. Mem
bers of the school board and the
superintendent were called by the
plaintiff as adverse witnesses. The
plaintiff maintained that Negro
teachers and principals were paid
lower salaries solely because Of
their race or color. The defense
was that all of the teachers were
paid on an individual basis pur-
suant to an elaborate rating sys-
TEN, and denied that race or color
was involved in the fixing of sal
aries. The record in the case, con-
sisting of 1872 printed pages in two
volumes, contained all of the sal
aries of all of the teachers, min
utes of the school board, and other
material.
On March 10, 1914, United States
District Judge Thomas C. Trimble
entered an order dismissing the COM
plant of the Negro teachers and
awarding defendants costs of Court.
On the following day, attorneys for
the Negro teachers filed a notice
of appeal to the United States Cir
cult Court of Appeals.
In the meantime, the defendants
refused to rehire the original plain
tiff, Susie Morris, and Frances P.
Hibbler, another Negro teacher, in
tervened, as a party plaintiff pur-
suant to order of Court.
The case was argued before the
United States Circuit Court of APP
peals for the Eighth Circuit here
in st. Paul May with Thurgood
Marshall and ]. r. Booker, of
Little Rock, representing the Ne
gro teachers. William H. HASTE,
Chairman of the National Legal
Committee, Edward R. Dudley, As
sistant Special Counsel, and Myles
A. Hibbler, appeared as of Coun-
sci on the brief for the Negro
teachers of Little Rock.
The concluding paragraph of the
June 18th opinion by Judge Thomas
reads as follows: THE judgment
dismissing the complaint is re-
versed. The case is remanded to
the District Court with directions
to enter forthwith the declaratory
judgment prayed for" reserve
jurisdiction to enter such further
orders as may be required to make
the judgment effective, and for fur
Their proceedings not inconsistent
with this opinion. The District
Court is also directed that such
judgment shall be without prejudice
to the rights of the plaintiffs in case
they believe their declared rights
are violated to apply for an order
requiring the defendants to show
cause why the injunction prayed for
in the complaint should not be
granted, or for such other appro-
pirate relief as they may elect to
seek"
The American Civil Liberties
Union filed a brief amicus curiae
in the U. S. Court of Appeals.
Immediately after the favorable
decisions in the Maryland and Vir-
ginia teachers salary cases many
local school boards attempted to
evade the force of these opinions
by setting up so-called rating sys-
TENS. The Little Rock case is the
first test case of its kind to reach
the appellate courts. 1t is hoped
that the precedent established in
this casa 1uill hn fnllnwad h,r othnr