Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1955-12-19


that it allows certain parts Q
meet the Supreme Court decision
banning public school segregation
because Of race.
Lawsuits are expected. But the
Gray plan is flexible enough,
commission members say. to be
revised to meet problems not
anticipated at this time. They
can't determine the question OF
Iconstitutionality by generaliza-
tons. They say they must know
the precise set of conditions
which would be challenged.
Legality Argued
Constitutionality of both main
features of the Gray plan is being
argued in the debate that now
RACES throughout the Old Do
minion.
immediately involved is the
proposition to be voted on Janu-
AIRY 8. The question to be set
tied then is whether conven-
ton shall be authorized to amend
section 14l of the State Consti-
tuition to permit the use of public
funds for educating children in
private non-sectarian schools II
they object to attending public
lintegrated schools.
The second principal feature
Iof the Gray plan being chal-
Ilenged is a pupil assignment
system that would be enacted
by the General Assembly after
lit convenes January II.
In debate at the recent spe-
cial session of the Assembly
Delegate Armistead L. Boothe OF
Alexandria argued it is impos-
sible to amend Section l4l
which prohibits private tuition
grants, without also weakening
the public school system re-
CURED by Section 129
Other Opponents Object
This same objection has been
raised by other opponents OF
next months referendum, in
Icluding Delegates Kathryn Stone
Iof Arlington: John Webb and
IOmer L. Hirst, both of Fairfax.
State Senator Charles r. Fen
wick Of Arlington, a member OF
the Gray Commission. says:
Section l29 requiring the
General Assembly to maintain a
free public school SYSTEM re-
mains untouched Section l4l
prohibits the appropriation OF
State funds to schools or institu-
Itions not owned or exclusively
Icontrolled by the State or some
Subdivision thereof, except that
counties, cities and towns and
districts can now make appropri-
atoms to non-sectarian schools
Iof manual, industrial or tech
Inical training.
What we propose to do is
simply to expand these educa-
| tional grants for use in ele-
Imentary, secondary and collie
lsiate institutions of non
Isectarian private nature. II Sec
Ition 1919 is being undermined,
lit has already been undermined
by the powers now present in
Section l41."
| Answers to a list Of questions
released by the Governors Office
explored this matter further ir
the following language:
NAACP Challenge Seen
Laws passed by the Genera
Assembly (for private tuition
grants) pursuant to the pro.
posed amendment of Section 141
will undoubtedly be challenged
by the National Association fol-
the Advancement of Coloree
People.
However. -. this type Of pro-
gram is, in effect. similar to tn,
CT Bill of Rights program es'
tablished by the Federal Gov
eminent and it is felt that any
challenge directed against a Law
of this type could be defended
successfully"
Mr.. Boothe argued in thu
Legislature that the pupil as
signment proposal would b.
adequate to meet problems ii
!Southside and Eastern Virgins
with heavy Negro populations
He cautioned that the tuition
grant proposal may be thrown
out as unconstitutional regard.
less Of revisions to Section l41
The answers from the Gov
errors Office say:
"Of course, any law passed BY
the General Assembly that limit!
aid Of white children only woulc
be unconstitutional. However
1.-THE tuition aid proposed by tn,
Gray Commission would b.
equally available to both whit,
and colored children"