Evening star., 1954-11-22
By Robert K. Wolsh

THE December 6 scheduled start OF
! Supreme Court hearings on public
school integration complexities makes
especially timely book just pubHshed
by the Institute or Government Of the
University Of North Carolina.
Even more than its title suggests,
HThe School Segregation Decision" Of
ferS laynlen and lawyers D deeper un-
derstanding Of the meaning, back
ground and possible consequences Of
the May n decision that outlawed
racial segregation Id public schools.
The 132-page volume, available for
So from the university at Chapel Hill.
N. g., was written by Albert Coates and
James G. N. Paul, director and assistant
director. respectively. Of the institute.
Those two law professors have pro-
duced work that is especially signlf-
icant and helpful because. IN a tem-
perate. expert and generally optimistic
treatment. it explains vast problems
confronting several other States. In so
doing, it represents the thinking Of
many Southern leaders earnestly
searching for equitable methods Of
complying with the spirit and letter Of
the decision.
The week Of oral arguments next
month may eventually bring Supreme
Court DEGREES and an ultimate pat
tern" that could come to be regarded
as momentous as was the historic May
II ruling. The court, as Profs. Coates
and Paul observe, settled the basic con-
stitutional question.
"But the law OF compliance is yet
to come" they emphasize. 1.-THE sec
ond decision poses entirely different
legal questions and legal consequences.
The second question permits great dis
cretion in revolving the awesome prob
lens which grow out OF the first. We
are dealing now. not with the validity
Of segregation, but with the remedial
steps to be taken in the light of the
invalidity Of segregation and in the
light Of attempting to implement that
proposition into law"
Any one who supposes that the prob
lem Is fairly simple and can be solved
rather quickly in an agreeable and
equitable way for all concerned will
find plenty Of reason to think 1t over
more carefully after reading this book.
Similarly, ony one who fears It never
can be solved and never will be ac-
cepted In some sections can take heart
from the findings and suggestions.
The material was contained orig
inally in report to the Governor Of
North Carolina on the implications Of
the May II decision and moves that
the State might properly consider. It
deals principally with interracial con-
ditions and legislative and administra-
tive avenues conceivably open to North
Carolina. Yet, the analysis and ideas
apply adequately to most other States
that have operated segregated school
systems.
Moreover, this book is more. .compre-
hensive than the legal briefs submitted
to the Supreme Court earlier this
month by North Carolina and several
other States and the District prepara4
tory to the December hearings. 1t is
doubly strong because it avoids the ap-
pearance of trying to make set case.
much less to imply criticism Of the
May II decision.
What is written here is but be-
ginning" the authors explain. "The
segregation issue Is challenge In the
,Toynbeean sense: perhaps it will prove
to be one Of the greatest challenges OF
our history. -. This study concen-
trates on. the legal aspects Of the school
segregation challenge. albeit that is
only one phase Of the matter. 1t pro-
poses no pananea, no particular ap-
proach. It is simply first attempt at
analysis written at o time when the
need. for, something along this line
seemed apparent"
The authors honestly stipulate that
the book Is inconclusive and readily
may become outdated in various re-
spectS. But they are too modest.
Their research and range embrace
every important consideration and pos
sible alternative which State officials
and others already are weighing and
which the Supreme Court unquestion-
ably will examine thoroughly in the
months to come.
It is natural, without being argu-
mentative or obstructive, that the
authors should stress what they regard
as the desirability in general Of q
gradual adjustment" from segrega-
ton to integration, without tolerating
stalling by the States Accordingly. 1t
is not surprising that they believe the
court:
Can be persuaded to establish q
principle for gradual adjustment which
will leave great discretion as to ways
and means to the responsible State
school authorities. Perhaps it can be
persuaded to formulate law which will
provide roughly that the Federal
courts should stay their hands COM
pletely until the school authorities have
devised and inaugurated plan reason
able on its face. Only If these meas
ures prove to be patiently invalid,
or only if nothing is attempted by
the school authorities after a reason
able length Of time, should the courts
intervene"
Summarizing this aspect Of the prob
lem, Prof. Paul declares: Nothing in
the (May 17) opinion suggests that
the Supreme Court is hell-bent to
force immediate integration upon the
States which have for years operated
TA:@ ~NI IT,